Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Ankra

by ai.ankra
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Delete pipeline schedule

delete_pipeline_schedule
Destructive

Delete a repository's pipeline schedule; runs it already started are kept. To pause one instead, update_pipeline_schedule with enabled false. Address the repository with exactly one of repository_id, application_id, or owner and repo. Needs pipelines.manage.

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": {
      "pipeline_schedule_id": "<pipeline_schedule_id>"
    },
    "name": "delete_pipeline_schedule"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
repoNoRepository name, with owner.
ownerNoRepository owner (organisation or user), with repo, instead of repository_id.
providerNoNarrows owner and repo when the same repository is connected on two providers.
repository_idNoThe connected repository's id, from list_pipeline_repositories.
application_idNoAn application whose linked repository to address, instead of repository_id.
pipeline_schedule_idYesThe schedule, from list_pipeline_schedules.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Added

TDQS

A4.9/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=false, yet the description still adds non-obvious behavior: runs already started are kept after the schedule is deleted. Combined with the permission requirement and the pause redirection, this gives the agent context the annotations cannot express.

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 compact sentences, each doing distinct work: destruction semantics first, then the alternative, then addressing and permission. No filler and no restatement of the name.

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 six-parameter destructive tool with no output schema, the definition covers what is destroyed, what survives, the permission needed, the addressing rule, and the non-destructive alternative. The remaining detail (provider narrowing, id lookup sources) is fully documented in the schema.

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 the baseline would be 3, but the description adds a cross-parameter constraint that the schema only implies piecemeal: address the repository with exactly one of repository_id, application_id, or owner and repo. The exclusivity rule is real guidance beyond the individual field descriptions.

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 a specific verb plus resource, "Delete a repository's pipeline schedule", and immediately distinguishes it from the nearest sibling by pointing at update_pipeline_schedule for pausing. An agent can tell delete apart from update without opening either schema.

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?

It gives an explicit alternative and the condition that selects it: to pause a schedule, use update_pipeline_schedule with enabled false. It also states the required permission (pipelines.manage), so the agent knows the precondition before calling.

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

All Ankra 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