Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Azquo

by ai.azquo
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Delete report

delete_report
DestructiveIdempotent

Permanently delete one online report (an Excel report users run in Azquo): its workbook file, its menu entries, its external data requests and its schedules. NOT REVERSIBLE - unlike delete_name there is no restore; read it first with read_workbook if its layout may be wanted again. Do not delete without the user asking for it. The databases the report showed are not touched.

Get the id from list_reports. Needs an administrator, or the developer who uploaded the report. Errors report_not_found when the id is not one of the reports list_reports shows you. Returns {deleted: true, id}.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYesNumeric report id, as returned by list_reports, e.g. 17
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.

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. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / id / description
      Previous value: -"Report ID to delete"New value: +"Numeric report id, as returned by list_reports, e.g. 17"
  3. First observed

TDQS

A4.7/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=true, but the description adds substantial context beyond them: the exact artifacts removed, irreversibility with no restore, that the underlying databases are untouched, the authorization requirement (administrator or the uploading developer), and the report_not_found error condition.

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?

Front-loaded with the destructive verb and scope before any caveats, and every sentence carries distinct information (irreversibility, read-first advice, consent requirement, blast-radius boundary, id sourcing, auth, error, return shape). Dense but nothing is wasted.

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, irreversible operation it supplies everything an agent needs: prerequisites from list_reports, authorization model, error behavior, blast radius relative to databases, and the return shape {deleted: true, id} in the absence of an output schema.

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 both parameters are already documented, including the business override and its rationale. The description only adds the sourcing hint for id from list_reports, which the schema already states. Baseline 3 is appropriate when the schema carries the parameter burden.

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?

Specific verb (delete) plus a precisely scoped resource (one online report, defined as an Excel report users run in Azquo), with an enumeration of what is destroyed: workbook file, menu entries, external data requests, schedules. It also distinguishes itself from the sibling delete_name by noting the absence of any restore path.

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?

Gives explicit when/when-not and alternatives: 'Do not delete without the user asking for it', read it first with read_workbook if the layout may be wanted, and contrasts with delete_name which can be restored. It also states where to obtain the id (list_reports).

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