Skip to main content
Glama

Clipform

by io.github.Clipform

Delete Clipform

clipform_delete_form
DestructiveIdempotent

Move a form and all its nodes to the trash. It stops accepting responses immediately and can be restored later. Requires user confirmation before it runs.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
confirmNoSet to true ONLY after the user has explicitly confirmed this destructive action. Leave unset otherwise - hosts that support confirmation dialogs will prompt the user automatically.
contextYesDescribe the user's underlying goal in one sentence - not the tool you're calling.
form_idYesThe form UUID to delete (returned by clipform_create_form, not the short share_id from the URL)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

  1. Changed3 schema fields changed
    • removedInput schema / additionalProperties
      Removed value: -false
    • addedInput schema / properties / context
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Describe the user's underlying goal in one sentence - not the tool you're calling.",
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • changedInput schema / required
      Previous value: -[
-  "form_id"
-]New value: +[
+  "form_id",
+  "context"
+]
  2. First observed

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Even though annotations already mark the tool as destructive, the description adds valuable behavioral detail: data is moved to trash, can be restored, stops accepting responses immediately, and requires user confirmation. This goes well beyond the annotations and sets accurate expectations for a destructive operation.

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

Conciseness5/5

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

Three short sentences convey the effect, immediate consequence, recoverability, and confirmation requirement without unnecessary detail. It is front-loaded with the most important action.

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

Completeness5/5

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

For a destructive tool, the description adequately covers what happens, what does not happen, and what guardrail exists. Combined with the annotations and full schema coverage, an agent has enough information to decide and invoke the tool correctly.

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%, so the parameters are already well documented. The description adds no significant parameter-specific meaning beyond confirming the destructive nature already explained by the confirm parameter description.

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 a specific action ('Move a form and all its nodes to the trash'), the resource affected, and the scope. It also differentiates from sibling tools like clipform_delete_node by emphasizing it covers an entire form plus its nodes.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

The description implies when to use it: when a form should stop accepting responses and be recoverable later. However, it does not explicitly give alternatives, such as clipform_update_form for disabling a form or clipform_delete_node for removing only one node, so some inference is required.

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

All Clipform toolsInspect
Try in Browser
RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A4.1/5.0
Disambiguation4/5

Most tools have clearly distinct purposes: form CRUD, node management, media upload/attach, rendering, search, and guidance retrieval are all separable. The main overlap is among the three render tools (clipform_generate_video, clipform_render_video_template, clipform_render_composition), but their descriptions include explicit disambiguation guidance, so an agent can correctly choose. clipform_get_guide and clipform_get_workflow are also similar but clearly differentiated.

Naming Consistency4/5

Tool names follow a consistent clipform_<verb>_<noun> pattern throughout, e.g., clipform_create_form, clipform_add_node, clipform_update_node, clipform_delete_node. Minor deviations exist: clipform_whoami is not verb_noun, and get_more_tools lacks the clipform_ prefix, but these are edge cases and the overall convention is highly predictable.

Tool Count3/5

34 tools is on the heavy side for a single MCP server. The server covers a broad domain (form creation, node editing, media management, video rendering, TTS, search, guidance, imports, responses), so the count is defensible, but it is above the typical well-scoped range and may add navigation overhead.

Completeness5/5

The tool surface covers the full lifecycle: create/read/update/delete forms and nodes, media upload/attach/delete, multiple render paths with status checking, TTS generation, music/image/video search, form import, response retrieval, and workflow/guide knowledge. The main gap is lack of a direct branching-logic editor (option-based branching is only in the dashboard), but the API consciously documents that limitation and the rest of the lifecycle is complete.

Resources