CueFrame

Delete Composition

delete_composition

DestructiveIdempotent

Delete a composition (and its version history) from a project. REFUSES the ACTIVE composition (409) — make another one active first, or delete the project. Use list_compositions to see which is active.

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": {
      "projectId": "<projectId>",
      "compositionId": "<compositionId>"
    },
    "name": "delete_composition"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`commandId`	No	Retry identity. A call repeated with the same commandId returns the first result instead of acting twice.
`projectId`	Yes	projectId (path).
`compositionId`	Yes	compositionId (path).

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed5 schema fields changedOct 28, 2026
- addedInput schema / $defs
```
Added value: +{
+  "__schema0": {
+    "maxLength": 128,
+    "minLength": 1,
+    "type": "string"
+  }
+}
```
- addedInput schema / properties / commandId / $ref
```
Added value: +"#/$defs/__schema0"
```
- removedInput schema / properties / commandId / maxLength
```
Removed value: -128
```
- removedInput schema / properties / commandId / minLength
```
Removed value: -1
```
- removedInput schema / properties / commandId / type
```
Removed value: -"string"
```

Changed1 schema field changedOct 22, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / commandId

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Retry identity. A call repeated with the same commandId returns the first result instead of acting twice.",
+  "maxLength": 128,
+  "minLength": 1,
+  "type": "string"
+}

First observedOct 10, 2026

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, so the safety profile is covered; the description goes further by disclosing the cascade (version history is deleted), the 409 refusal condition, and remediation steps. Those are behavioral facts an agent cannot derive from the annotations.

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 short sentences, front-loaded with the destructive action and its blast radius before the refusal rule. No filler and no restatement of the 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?

For a 3-parameter destructive tool with no output schema, the description covers what is destroyed, when the call will fail, and how to avoid that failure. Nothing an agent needs to call it correctly is missing.

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 projectId, compositionId and the commandId retry-identity semantics are already documented in the schema. The description adds no parameter-level meaning beyond the schema, so baseline 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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Delete a composition') and adds scope that a name alone cannot convey: the version history is destroyed too. That distinguishes it cleanly from delete_project, delete_brief and delete_media in the sibling list.

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 the exclusion — the ACTIVE composition is refused with 409 — and gives two concrete paths forward (activate another composition, or delete the project). It also routes the agent to list_compositions to determine active state before calling, which is exactly the pre-call check an agent needs.

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

All CueFrame tools Inspect

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.