Conecto

Delete rows

rows_delete

DestructiveIdempotent

Delete rows by their numbers, for good. Free.

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": {
      "table": "<table>",
      "rows": "<rows>"
    },
    "name": "rows_delete"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`rows`	Yes
`table`	Yes	The table's name (or its table_id).

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedOct 28, 2026

TDQS

B3.2/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

The annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and readOnlyHint=false. The description adds that deletion is permanent ("for good"), which is useful beyond the annotations, but "Free" is ambiguous and the description does not mention permissions, missing-row behavior, or any other operational context.

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?

The definition is a single front-loaded sentence with no filler. The word "Free" is vague and does not clearly earn its place, which keeps it from being fully concise and structured.

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

Completeness3/5

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

For a simple two-parameter destructive tool with annotations covering safety and no output schema, the definition is minimally adequate. It notes permanent deletion, but it omits the table context in the description and does not explain behavior when requested row numbers do not exist.

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?

Schema description coverage is 50%: the table parameter is documented in the schema, while the rows parameter is not. The description partially compensates by clarifying that rows are specified by their numbers, but it does not mention the table parameter or the array size constraints (1-1000).

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description states a specific verb and resource ("Delete rows") and adds the keying method ("by their numbers"). It does not differentiate this from nearby siblings such as rows_update, rows_upsert, or rows_add, so it falls short of a 5.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

The description gives no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like rows_update, rows_upsert, or rows_add. "For good" hints that deletion is permanent, but there are no explicit conditions, prerequisites, or exclusions.

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

All Conecto 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?