Gogi

Delete Trading Instance

delete_instance

Destructive

Permanently delete a trading instance and free a slot (max 10 per user). Stop ≠ delete. For live instances pass force=true. If open positions exist, the tool returns error_type=open_positions_require_confirm with open_positions — show them to the user, warn that delete will close all open positions, then retry with confirm_close_positions=true after explicit user OK.

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": {
      "instance_id": "<instance_id>"
    },
    "name": "delete_instance"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`force`	No	Required true when the instance is live; stops then deletes
`instance_id`	Yes	ID of the trading instance to delete (from list_instances)
`confirm_close_positions`	No	Required true when open positions exist; closes them then deletes

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`error`	No
`message`	No
`success`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed2 schema fields changedSep 13, 2026

changedOutput schema / description

Previous value: -"Structured Gogi result. Error responses include error and message fields."New value: +"Structured result. Error responses include error and message."

addedOutput schema / properties

Added value: +{
+  "error": {
+    "type": "string"
+  },
+  "message": {
+    "type": "string"
+  },
+  "success": {
+    "type": "boolean"
+  }
+}

Changed1 schema field changedSep 13, 2026

changedOutput schema / (root)

Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "additionalProperties": true,
+  "description": "Structured Gogi result. Error responses include error and message fields.",
+  "type": "object"
+}

First observedSep 13, 2026

TDQS

A4.8/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, but the description adds substantially more: slot freeing behavior, the stop-vs-delete distinction, the exact error_type returned, and the critical warning that deletion closes all open positions. This goes well beyond what annotations provide.

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 core action, then layers the conditions and error path efficiently. Dense but each sentence earns its place; slight density makes it less scannable than ideal 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?

Covers the mutation's destructive nature, the two guard flags, the exact error contract, and the required user-confirmation workflow. With an output schema present, return values needn't be explained, and no gaps remain for correct invocation.

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 baseline is 3. The description adds meaning not in the schema by explaining WHEN each flag is needed (force for live, confirm_close_positions for open positions) and the ordering of the recovery flow, which the schema's terse descriptions don't convey.

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?

Clear verb+resource: 'Permanently delete a trading instance and free a slot (max 10 per user).' It explicitly distinguishes from the sibling stop_instance with 'Stop ≠ delete,' so the agent can tell it apart without inspecting schemas.

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?

Provides explicit conditions and alternatives: use force=true for live instances, and a full three-step recovery path (show open_positions, warn, retry with confirm_close_positions=true after explicit OK). This is about as prescriptive as usage guidance gets.

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

All Gogi 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.

Resources

Need Help?