xmagnet

delete_chatbot

Destructive

PERMANENTLY delete a website chatbot. This takes it off the customer's live site immediately and cannot be undone. ALWAYS call once without confirm to see exactly which chatbot would go, show that to the user, get an explicit yes, and only then call again with confirm=true. Never pass confirm=true on the first call.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`domain`	No	Which chatbot to delete
`confirm`	No	Must be true to actually delete. Only set after the user explicitly agreed.

TDQS

A4.9/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

While annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, the description adds irreversibility, immediate removal from the live site, and the preview-before-confirm behavior. These details go well beyond the structured annotations and are critical for safe use.

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 sentences, all substantive: the destructive claim, the real-world consequence, and the safe calling pattern. No filler or repetition; key warnings are front-loaded.

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 two-parameter tool with no output schema, this description covers purpose, impact, irreversibility, and a precise two-step confirmation flow. It even hints at what the first call returns ('see exactly which chatbot would go'), so an agent has enough context to invoke it safely and 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 description coverage is 100%, with both domain and confirm already documented. The description adds value by explaining the confirm=false preview step and the rule that confirm=true must never appear on the first call, but the schema already covers the core meaning of each parameter.

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?

Starts with 'PERMANENTLY delete a website chatbot,' a specific verb and resource, and distinguishes this destructive operation from sibling tools like rename_chatbot, update_chatbot_links, and create_website_chatbot. The immediate live-site impact further clarifies what deleting means.

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 call protocol: first call without confirm to preview, show the user, get explicit consent, then call with confirm=true, and never pass confirm=true on the first call. This is strong, actionable guidance that removes ambiguity about when and how to invoke the tool.

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

All xmagnet tools Inspect

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

B3.4/5.0

Disambiguation2/5

Several tools occupy nearly identical roles (create_contact/add_contacts/save_contacts_to_crm/upload_contacts; add_companies/create_company; search_contacts/search_crm_contacts/find_contacts_at_companies), and the names don't clearly reveal whether they operate on saved or prospected data. Although the descriptions clarify some boundaries, an agent would frequently need to read many descriptions carefully to avoid mis-selection.

Naming Consistency4/5

Most tools follow a snake_case verb_noun pattern such as list_campaigns, create_deal, and update_contact. Minor deviations like company_intelligence, get_icp, load_more_contacts, and the inconsistent use of add_/create_/upload_/save_ for similar creation actions keep it from being fully consistent.

Tool Count1/5

51 tools is far beyond the well-scoped range and exceeds the 50+ extreme threshold. Even for a broad CRM/prospecting/marketing platform, exposing this many tools at once makes agent selection costly and unwieldy.

Completeness2/5

Contact and company creation/read/update are covered, but delete is absent across the board, and campaigns can be drafted, listed, and measured but not edited, activated, paused, or deleted. Deals, forms, and landing pages also lack update/delete lifecycle actions, creating meaningful dead ends for common CRM workflows.

Resources

Need Help?