Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Qualtrics MCP Server

Qualtrics MCP Server

by yrvelez
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

delete_response

Destructive

Delete a specific survey response from Qualtrics by providing the survey ID, response ID, and confirming deletion.

Instructions

Delete a survey response

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "surveyId": "<surveyId>",
      "responseId": "<responseId>",
      "confirmDelete": "<confirmDelete>"
    },
    "name": "delete_response"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
surveyIdYesThe Qualtrics survey ID
responseIdYesThe response ID to delete
confirmDeleteYesMust be true to confirm deletion

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

B3.2/5.0
Behavior3/5

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

The description aligns with the destructiveHint annotation, but adds no extra behavioral context beyond what is already indicated. It does not disclose side effects, permanence, or required permissions.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is extremely concise, using a single phrase with no wasted words. It is front-loaded but could benefit from a slightly more structured sentence to improve readability.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the simple destructive operation and full schema coverage, the description is minimally complete. However, it omits details about return values or permissions, which would be helpful for agents.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

With 100% schema description coverage, the schema already documents all three parameters. The tool description does not add any additional meaning or usage context beyond the schema.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description 'Delete a survey response' clearly states the verb and resource, distinguishing it from siblings like delete_survey and delete_question. However, it lacks additional specificity about scope or context.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., when not to delete, prerequisites). The destructiveHint annotation hints at caution, but the description itself offers no explicit direction.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

Deploy Server

Other Tools