Skip to main content
Glama

Timix.AI

by ai.timix

delete_customer

Soft-delete a billing customer and its whole hierarchy (projects, tasks, subtasks) into the recycle bin, where an admin can restore it. Returns a preview unless confirm=true is set.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
confirmNoSet true to perform the action. Omit or false returns a preview only — nothing is written.
customer_idYesId of the customer to delete.
idempotency_keyNoOptional caller-supplied key; retrying with the same key returns the original result instead of acting twice.

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description fully discloses the soft-delete nature, hierarchy deletion, recycle bin, admin restore capability, and the preview-versus-confirm behavior. This provides good transparency for a write operation.

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?

Two sentences, no fluff. Concisely conveys the key behavioral aspects and the confirm toggle without extra words.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the tool's low complexity (3 params, no output schema), the description adequately covers behavior, side effects, and the preview mechanism. It could slightly improve by hinting at the preview's content, but it's sufficient.

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?

All parameters have complete schema descriptions (100% coverage). The description adds no additional semantics beyond noting the preview behavior, which is already in the confirm parameter description.

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 clearly states the tool performs a soft-delete of a billing customer and its entire hierarchy, which distinguishes it from other delete tools (e.g., permanent_delete_entity). The verb 'soft-delete' and resource specification are precise.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

While the description implies this tool is for safe, reversible deletion, it does not explicitly guide when to use this over alternatives like permanent_delete_entity. No when-not or context for admin-only restore is given.

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

All Timix.AI toolsInspect
Try in Browser
RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

B3/5.0
Disambiguation2/5

Multiple tools have overlapping purposes, e.g., create_time_report and log_time both create a single time entry with near-identical descriptions. There are also many similar getter/list tools that blur together, making it hard for an agent to select the right one.

Naming Consistency2/5

Most tool names use snake_case, but verbs are inconsistent: 'list' vs 'get' for similar operations, 'manage' combines create/update/delete, and 'use_favorite' is an outlier. This pattern reduces predictability.

Tool Count1/5

With 114 tools, the set is extremely large and far beyond a well-scoped server (typical 3-15). This overwhelms agents and suggests many tools could be consolidated or removed.

Completeness3/5

The tool surface covers a broad domain including customers, projects, tasks, time tracking, invoicing, and user management, but there are gaps like no list_users or direct user listing, and some operations seem redundant rather than filling missing functionality.

Resources