Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Azquo

by ai.azquo
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Delete name

delete_name
DestructiveIdempotent

Delete a name from the database. Its values are deleted with it, as are the documents and images uploaded to it with create_upload_link (the response's documentsDeleted says how many) - those cannot be brought back. The name itself can: restore_name returns it, with its attributes, sets and children, as a new name (find it with list_deleted_names). Looks up by integer nameId — the id returned in apply_structure's namesResolved, or surfaced by describe_set / describe_query. Returns 404 if no name matches the id.

═══ PROVENANCE — required on every write ═══ source: origin reference (why this name is being deleted — usually a ticket, note, or upstream document). Lands in the audit trail. agent: your AI agent name (e.g. "Claude"). Lands in the audit trail.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
agentYesAI agent name (e.g. "Claude"). REQUIRED.
nameIdYesInteger id of the name to delete (from apply_structure namesResolved, describe_set, describe_query, etc.)
sourceYesOrigin reference — file, URL, document, or short note explaining the deletion. REQUIRED.
businessNoOptional. The business this call is for, by name, e.g. "azquo" - it then runs there whatever business the session is in. Worth giving on writes when you work in more than one business: a new MCP session starts in the login's own business. list_businesses shows the names.
databaseYesDatabase name

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / business
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Optional. The business this call is for, by name, e.g. \"azquo\" - it then runs there whatever business the session is in. Worth giving on writes when you work in more than one business: a new MCP session starts in the login's own business. list_businesses shows the names.",
+  "type": "string"
+}
  2. First observed

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations declare destructiveHint=true, but the description goes well beyond them: it names exactly what is destroyed (values, uploaded documents and images, with the response's documentsDeleted count), states that those cannot be brought back, explains that the name itself can be restored as a NEW name via restore_name, and documents the 404 on a missing id plus the mandatory audit provenance.

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?

Front-loads the destructive effect and the recovery path, then the lookup mechanics, then a clearly headed provenance block. Every element earns its place, though the prose is somewhat long for a five-parameter tool.

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?

No output schema exists, and the description compensates by describing the response field documentsDeleted and the 404 failure mode. Combined with the cascade/restore semantics and the required provenance fields, an agent has everything needed to invoke it correctly.

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 is 3, but the description adds rationale the schema lacks: why nameId is an integer and where it comes from, and the audit-trail purpose of source/agent, including a concrete example for the agent name. It slightly duplicates schema text but reinforces the semantics.

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 and resource (delete a name) and immediately distinguishes its effect: values, documents and images uploaded via create_upload_link are destroyed while the name itself is recoverable. An agent can tell exactly what this does versus edit_name_attributes or restore_name.

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?

Gives clear context for use — look up by integer nameId sourced from apply_structure/describe_set/describe_query — and points to restore_name and list_deleted_names for recovery. It does not spell out an explicit when-not-to-use case, but no sibling performs the same deletion, so the guidance is effectively complete.

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

All Azquo 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