Simpler.Asia

myinvois_customer_delete

DestructiveIdempotent

Delete a registered buyer. E-invoices already generated for this buyer keep their sealed copy of the buyer party and are never touched. Refuses an id outside your tenant with NOT_FOUND: call myinvois_customer_list for valid ids.

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": {
      "id": "<id>"
    },
    "name": "myinvois_customer_delete"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`id`	Yes	The myinvois_customer id.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedOct 23, 2026

TDQS

A4.7/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already flag destructive=true and idempotent=true, yet the description adds non-obvious behavior: already-generated e-invoices retain a sealed copy of the buyer party and are untouched. It also documents the cross-tenant refusal and its NOT_FOUND error, which no structured field conveys.

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, each load-bearing: the action, the non-effect on issued invoices, and the error/recovery path. The most important fact (what happens to existing invoices) is front-loaded after the verb.

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 one-parameter destructive delete with no output schema, the description covers the action, the side-effect boundary, and the failure case plus recovery. Nothing an agent needs to call it safely is missing.

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% and the single parameter is documented there, so the baseline is 3. The description still contributes meaning by constraining the id to the caller's tenant and pointing to the list tool as the source of valid ids.

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?

Opens with a specific verb+resource: 'Delete a registered buyer.' This is unambiguous and easily separated from the sibling read/list/update/search customer tools by the verb alone.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

Explicitly routes the agent to myinvois_customer_list to obtain valid ids and frames the tenant-boundary failure mode. It stops short of stating when deletion is appropriate versus updating, but given there is no deactivate sibling, the practical guidance is clear.

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

All Simpler.Asia 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?