Layerz

Delete branch

layerz_delete_branch

DestructiveIdempotent

Deletes a branch, every input row tagged with its dataset_id, and the data sources that fed only that branch (their staged transactions with them); a source shared with another branch is detached instead. The default branch is rejected. Returns deleted_dataset_id, inputs_removed, sources_removed. Persists one version labelled with summary. Not advertised to read-only keys.

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": {
      "summary": "<summary>",
      "dataset_id": "<dataset_id>"
    },
    "name": "layerz_delete_branch"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`summary`	Yes	Short note (3–100 chars) describing the change, stored as the label of the resulting version. Examples: "Renamed Revenue to Net Revenue", "Imported 2024 OPEX from Excel".
`model_id`	No	Target model UUID. Required for user-scoped API keys; validated against the bound model for model-scoped keys.
`dataset_id`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed2 schema fields changedSep 30, 2026

changedInput schema / properties / model_id / description

Previous value: -"Target model UUID. Required for user-scoped API keys; ignored (or validated against scope) for model-scoped keys."New value: +"Target model UUID. Required for user-scoped API keys; validated against the bound model for model-scoped keys."

changedInput schema / properties / summary / description

Previous value: -"Required: short human-readable note (3–100 chars) summarising what this change does. Shown as the label in the model version history. Be specific (e.g. \"Renamed Revenue to Net Revenue\", \"Imported 2024 OPEX from Excel\")."New value: +"Short note (3–100 chars) describing the change, stored as the label of the resulting version. Examples: \"Renamed Revenue to Net Revenue\", \"Imported 2024 OPEX from Excel\"."

First observedSep 17, 2026

TDQS

A4.7/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the destructive and idempotent annotations, the description discloses cascade deletion rules, the shared-source detach behavior, default-branch rejection, version persistence, return fields, and API-key visibility. These are exactly the behavioral details an agent needs before invoking a destructive tool.

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?

The description is dense but front-loaded with the action and cascade scope, followed by rejection rules, return values, and version behavior. Every clause contributes actionable information.

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 cascade operation with no output schema, the description covers the affected entities, shared-source edge case, default-branch restriction, return keys, version persistence, and key visibility. It is complete enough for an agent to invoke 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 coverage is 67%, so the schema already documents summary and model_id. The description adds operational meaning for dataset_id by tying it to deleted input rows and affected sources, and reinforces that summary becomes the persisted version label.

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 uses a specific verb and resource ("Deletes a branch") and immediately clarifies the cascade scope: input rows, branch-only data sources, and their staged transactions. This is enough to distinguish it from sibling mutation tools like layerz_update_branch.

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?

It gives clear when-not conditions: the default branch is rejected, and it is not advertised to read-only keys. It does not explicitly route the agent to alternatives such as layerz_update_branch, so it stops short of full when-to-use guidance.

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

All Layerz tools Inspect

Try in Browser

Claude Code, inside the Godot 4 editorFlockbay puts an AI agent in the real Godot 4 editor: it writes GDScript, runs your game and fixes what breaks. Free, or bring your own Claude Code or Codex.flockbay.comAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources

Need Help?