Skip to main content
Glama

AgentPlaybooks

by ai.agentplaybooks

Delete secret

delete_secret
DestructiveIdempotent

Permanently delete a secret. Cannot be undone. Requires secrets:write or full permission. Use rotate_secret to replace the value without removing the name, and list_secrets to confirm the name first. This does not revoke the credential at the upstream provider. Pass playbook_id as the UUID or GUID of the playbook this call should target.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameYesSecret name to delete
playbook_idYesUUID or GUID of the target playbook

TDQS

A4.7/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the annotations (destructiveHint, readOnlyHint), the description adds critical context: 'Cannot be undone' and 'This does not revoke the credential at the upstream provider'. It also states the permission requirement, enriching the agent's understanding of side effects.

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 densely informative sentences with no filler. The main action and consequences are front-loaded, and every sentence serves a purpose (action, side-effect, alternatives, parameter hint).

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 with two required parameters and no output schema, the description covers purpose, irreversible consequences, permission, non-revocation, and parameter targeting. It is fully sufficient for an agent to select and invoke 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 coverage is 100% and the description only restates the playbook_id format already in the schema. It adds no new semantic value for parameters, so the baseline score of 3 applies.

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 opens with 'Permanently delete a secret', a specific verb+resource that clearly states the action. It also distinguishes itself from rotate_secret and list_secrets, making its unique purpose unambiguous.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

Explicitly names alternatives ('Use rotate_secret to replace the value without removing the name, and list_secrets to confirm the name first'), provides a permission prerequisite, and gives context on when this tool is appropriate. This is model usage guidance.

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

All AgentPlaybooks 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

A4.5/5.0
Disambiguation5/5

Each tool targets a distinct entity and action (e.g., delete_memory vs delete_skill vs delete_run), and even similar operations like read_memory vs search_memory vs get_memory_context have clearly differentiated purposes. The descriptions are detailed and explicitly cross-reference other tools to avoid confusion.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tool names follow a consistent verb_noun pattern (create_*, list_*, update_*, delete_*, read_*, etc.), with plurals used uniformly for list operations (list_playbooks, list_runs, list_secrets). No mixed conventions or ambiguous verbs; the naming is highly predictable and systematic.

Tool Count4/5

With 48 tools, the server covers a broad but coherent set of domains (playbooks, personas, skills, memory, canvas, runs, secrets, MCP servers, and discovery). While this exceeds the typical 3-15 range, each tool serves a distinct and necessary function within the comprehensive playbook management scope, so the count feels justified rather than bloated.

Completeness5/5

The tool surface provides complete CRUD and lifecycle coverage for every entity type: playbooks, personas, skills (including versioning and rollback), memory (including hierarchical tasks and tiering), canvas (with locking and patching), runs, secrets (including rotation and usage), and MCP servers. Additionally, find_tools covers discovery for federated tools, leaving no apparent dead ends.

Resources