GitFlic MCP Server

gitflic_branch_protection_delete

DestructiveIdempotent

Delete a branch-protection rule from a GitFlic project by specifying the project and rule UUID, so you can remove outdated or incorrect branch restrictions.

Instructions

Delete a branch-protection rule.

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": {
      "project": "<project>",
      "uuid": "<uuid>"
    },
    "name": "gitflic_branch_protection_delete"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`raw`	No	Return the full, un-slimmed GitFlic response for THIS call (no token compression). Use when the default slim view dropped a field you need.
`uuid`	Yes
`project`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.5.1Nov 13, 2026

TDQS

C2.7/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, idempotentHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the risk profile is covered structurally. The description adds nothing beyond that: it does not say whether the deletion is reversible, whether it affects open pull requests or push rules, or what happens to the branch once unprotected.

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

Conciseness3/5

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

The single sentence is clean and front-loaded with the verb and resource, with zero wasted wording. However, the brevity reflects under-specification rather than disciplined compression for a destructive operation with three parameters.

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?

For a simple delete-by-ID tool with no output schema and annotations covering the safety profile, the description is minimally adequate — an agent can call it knowing the target resource. It is missing identifier semantics for the required parameters and any note on the consequences of removing a protection rule, which matter for a destructive action.

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

Parameters2/5

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

Schema description coverage is only 33% — only the 'raw' parameter is documented. The description says nothing about 'project' or 'uuid', so the agent gets no hint about the format expected for uuid (rule ID vs branch name) or what identifier form 'project' takes. With low coverage, the description needed to compensate and does not.

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 gives a specific verb ('Delete') and resource ('branch-protection rule'), so the agent knows exactly which object is affected and can tell it apart from sibling mutation tools like gitflic_branch_protection_create or gitflic_branch_protection_edit by name and description. It stops short of any explicit sibling differentiation in the text itself.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this versus gitflic_branch_protection_edit (which might also remove protections), or versus gitflic_branch_delete (which removes the branch itself). No prerequisites, no mention of permissions or irreversibility are given, leaving the agent to infer usage purely from the tool name.

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

Deploy Server