Tangled MCP Server

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

delete_repo_issue

Delete an issue from a repository on Tangled's git collaboration platform. Provide the repository in 'owner/repo' format and the issue number to remove unwanted issues.

Instructions

delete an issue from a repository

Args: repo: repository identifier in 'owner/repo' format issue_id: issue number to delete

Returns: DeleteIssueResult with issue_id of deleted issue

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": {
      "repo": "<repo>",
      "issue_id": "<issue_id>"
    },
    "name": "delete_repo_issue"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`repo`	Yes	repository identifier in 'owner/repo' format (e.g., 'zzstoatzz/tangled-mcp')
`issue_id`	Yes	issue number to delete (e.g., 1, 2, 3...)

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`id`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed3 schema fields changedv0.0.12Apr 29, 2026
- addedOutput schema / properties / id
```
Added value: +{
+  "type": "integer"
+}
```
- removedOutput schema / properties / issue_id
```
Removed value: -{
-  "type": "integer"
-}
```
- changedOutput schema / required
```
Previous value: -[
-  "issue_id"
-]New value: +[
+  "id"
+]
```
Addedv1.0.0Jan 3, 2026

TDQS

B3.2/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

No annotations provided, so description bears full burden. It states deletion but does not elaborate on permanence, permissions, or side effects beyond the basic operation.

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?

Short and structured with Args and Returns sections. Every sentence adds value, though it could be slightly more concise by omitting the redundant Args block.

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 tool, basics are covered. Output schema exists, so return details are known. However, missing guidance on required permissions or potential side effects reduces completeness.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, and the description's Args section merely repeats schema info. No additional meaning or context is added.

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

Purpose5/5

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

The description clearly states 'delete an issue from a repository', which is a specific verb+resource. It distinguishes from siblings like create, update, and list.

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?

No guidance on when to use or when not to use this tool. It does not mention prerequisites, alternatives, or exclusions.

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

Deploy Server