Skip to main content
Glama

stub

by africa.stub.api
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Delete product

delete_product
DestructiveIdempotent

Delete one product or many to the bin (soft-delete, restorable). Send id for one product, which returns {error}. Or send ids (up to 1000) to delete many in one transaction, which returns {error, deleted: [id ...], errors: [{id, message} ...]}. That is partial success: ids this business does not own, or already deleted, are skipped and listed in errors, and error is true only when nothing was deleted. Document lines that used a product keep their own copies of name/price.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idNoOne product id to delete.
idsNoUp to 1000 product ids to delete in one transaction. Partial success: ids this business does not own are skipped and listed in errors.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed3 schema fields changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / id / description
      Added value: +"One product id to delete."
    • addedInput schema / properties / ids
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Up to 1000 product ids to delete in one transaction. Partial success: ids this business does not own are skipped and listed in errors.",
+  "items": {
+    "type": "string"
+  },
+  "maxItems": 1000,
+  "minItems": 1,
+  "type": "array"
+}
    • changedInput schema / required
      Previous value: -[
-  "id"
-]New value: +[]
  2. First observed

TDQS

A4.7/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already cover destructiveness and idempotency, and the description still adds substantial context beyond them: soft-delete is restorable, bulk runs in one transaction, partial success semantics (unowned/already-deleted ids skipped into errors), that `error` is true only when nothing was deleted, and that document lines retain their own name/price copies.

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 sentences, each front-loaded with the decision-relevant fact (restorability, then the id-vs-ids branch, then partial-success semantics). No filler or restatement of the name/title.

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?

With no output schema, the description carries the entire return-contract burden and does so precisely for both modes, including the counterintuitive 'error is true only when nothing was deleted' rule and document-line snapshot behavior. Nothing an agent needs to invoke or interpret the call is missing.

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

Parameters4/5

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

Schema coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3, but the description adds meaning the schema lacks: it ties each parameter to a distinct return contract (`id` → {error}; `ids` → {error, deleted, errors}) and explains the partial-success behavior of `ids`. It stops short of the factual limits the schema already carries (maxItems 1000).

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?

States a specific verb ('Delete') and resource ('product'), plus scope (one or many) and the nature of the delete ('soft-delete, restorable'). This distinguishes it from hard-delete siblings like delete_document and from restore_deleted (the inverse operation).

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

Explicitly routes the caller: 'Send `id` for one product... Or send `ids` (up to 1000) to delete many in one transaction.' That is clear usage context, but it never names a sibling alternative or states exclusions (e.g., when to prefer per-item delete over bulk, or that restore_deleted undoes this).

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

All stub toolsInspect
Try in Browser
One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources