Skip to main content
Glama

Dayze — Life Context

Delete Food (Food Diary remove)

delete_food
Destructive

Preview first, 30-day undo. Removes one Food Diary row the authenticated user owns and archives its mirrored calendar event. Prefer this over delete_event for meals logged via log_food. Unknown or other-user food_id returns an error. Rebuilds life_state. Reviewed and reversible: first call preview_destructive_change({ tool: "delete_food", arguments: { food_id } }), which stores the exact change without applying it. After the user confirms, call delete_food with preview_id, restore_window_acknowledged: true and request_id; the reviewed preview is applied exactly and a changed record is refused. Returns restore_id; restore_change({ restore_id }) undoes it for 30 days unless the record was edited since. Requires API key or OAuth with context.delete. Share tokens cannot write. ($0.10; API key required)

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
food_idYesUUID of a Food Diary row the authenticated user owns
preview_idYespreview_id returned by preview_destructive_change for this tool.
request_idYesRequired idempotency key; retries return the original receipt.
idempotency_keyNoAlias for request_id.
restore_window_acknowledgedYesMust be true after reviewing the preview and its 30-day restore window.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
accountNoThe Dayze account this data belongs to. With more than one Dayze connection, name it in the answer.
deletedYesDeleted food diary row.
food_idYes
event_idNo
preview_idNo
provenanceNoWhich connector wrote the record and which connected Dayze account received it.
restore_idNoPass to restore_change to undo within restore_window_days.
reversibleNo
idempotent_replayNo
life_state_rebuiltYes
restore_expires_atNo
restore_window_daysNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • addedOutput schema / properties / account
      Added value: +{
      +  "additionalProperties": false,
      +  "description": "The Dayze account this data belongs to. With more than one Dayze connection, name it in the answer.",
      +  "properties": {
      +    "display_name": {
      +      "description": "Account display name.",
      +      "type": [
      +        "string",
      +        "null"
      +      ]
      +    },
      +    "handle": {
      +      "description": "Account handle, e.g. @goh.",
      +      "type": [
      +        "string",
      +        "null"
      +      ]
      +    },
      +    "note": {
      +      "description": "How to disclose the account to the user.",
      +      "type": "string"
      +    },
      +    "qa_fixture": {
      +      "description": "True for a known QA test account: its records are fixture data, not a real life.",
      +      "type": "boolean"
      +    }
      +  },
      +  "required": [
      +    "handle",
      +    "display_name",
      +    "qa_fixture",
      +    "note"
      +  ],
      +  "type": "object"
      +}
    • addedOutput schema / properties / provenance
      Added value: +{
      +  "additionalProperties": false,
      +  "description": "Which connector wrote the record and which connected Dayze account received it.",
      +  "properties": {
      +    "account": {
      +      "additionalProperties": false,
      +      "description": "The Dayze account this data belongs to. With more than one Dayze connection, name it in the answer.",
      +      "properties": {
      +        "display_name": {
      +          "description": "Account display name.",
      +          "type": [
      +            "string",
      +            "null"
      +          ]
      +        },
      +        "handle": {
      +          "description": "Account handle, e.g. @goh.",
      +          "type": [
      +            "string",
      +            "null"
      +          ]
      +        },
      +        "note": {
      +          "description": "How to disclose the account to the user.",
      +          "type": "string"
      +        },
      +        "qa_fixture": {
      +          "description": "True for a known QA test account: its records are fixture data, not a real life.",
      +          "type": "boolean"
      +        }
      +      },
      +      "required": [
      +        "handle",
      +        "display_name",
      +        "qa_fixture",
      +        "note"
      +      ],
      +      "type": "object"
      +    },
      +    "channel": {
      +      "description": "Always mcp_connector.",
      +      "type": "string"
      +    },
      +    "connector": {
      +      "additionalProperties": false,
      +      "properties": {
      +        "kind": {
      +          "description": "oauth or api_key.",
      +          "type": "string"
      +        },
      +        "name": {
      +          "description": "The connected app or API-key label shown to the account owner.",
      +          "type": "string"
      +        }
      +      },
      +      "required": [
      +        "kind",
      +        "name"
      +      ],
      +      "type": "object"
      +    },
      +    "source": {
      +      "description": "chatgpt for ChatGPT OAuth writes; mcp for another OAuth app or API key.",
      +      "type": "string"
      +    }
      +  },
      +  "required": [
      +    "source",
      +    "channel",
      +    "connector",
      +    "account"
      +  ],
      +  "type": "object"
      +}
  2. Changed10 schema fields changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / preview_id
      Added value: +{
      +  "description": "preview_id returned by preview_destructive_change for this tool.",
      +  "type": "string"
      +}
    • changedInput schema / properties / request_id / description
      Previous value: -"Client idempotency key (retries return original result)."New value: +"Required idempotency key; retries return the original receipt."
    • addedInput schema / properties / restore_window_acknowledged
      Added value: +{
      +  "description": "Must be true after reviewing the preview and its 30-day restore window.",
      +  "type": "boolean"
      +}
    • changedInput schema / required
      Previous value: -[
      -  "food_id"
      -]New value: +[
      +  "food_id",
      +  "preview_id",
      +  "restore_window_acknowledged",
      +  "request_id"
      +]
    • addedOutput schema / properties / idempotent_replay
      Added value: +{
      +  "type": "boolean"
      +}
    • addedOutput schema / properties / preview_id
      Added value: +{
      +  "type": "string"
      +}
    • addedOutput schema / properties / restore_expires_at
      Added value: +{
      +  "type": "string"
      +}
    • addedOutput schema / properties / restore_id
      Added value: +{
      +  "description": "Pass to restore_change to undo within restore_window_days.",
      +  "type": "string"
      +}
    • addedOutput schema / properties / restore_window_days
      Added value: +{
      +  "type": "number"
      +}
    • addedOutput schema / properties / reversible
      Added value: +{
      +  "type": "boolean"
      +}
  3. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / idempotency_key
      Added value: +{
      +  "description": "Alias for request_id.",
      +  "type": "string"
      +}
    • addedInput schema / properties / request_id
      Added value: +{
      +  "description": "Client idempotency key (retries return original result).",
      +  "type": "string"
      +}
  4. Added

TDQS

A4.8/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already flag destructiveHint=true/readOnlyHint=false, but the description goes far beyond: 30-day undo window via restore_id, restore refusal if the record was edited since, rebuilds life_state, refusal of changed previews, idempotent request_id retries, auth requirements (API key or OAuth with context.delete, share tokens cannot write) and cost. This is rich behavioral disclosure.

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?

Front-loaded with the two headline facts ('Preview first, 30-day undo') and every sentence carries operational weight. It is dense and slightly repetitive in restating the preview/confirm step, but no sentence is filler for a tool with this much mandatory ceremony.

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?

Output schema exists so return values need no explanation, yet the description still names the returned restore_id. Auth, cost, error conditions, idempotency, and the preview workflow are all covered, leaving nothing an agent needs in order to call this destructive tool safely.

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 already 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds workflow meaning the schema cannot: why preview_id must come from preview_destructive_change, why restore_window_acknowledged must be true, and that request_id is an idempotency key. It explains the parameters' roles in the flow rather than their formats.

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?

States a specific verb+resource ('Removes one Food Diary row the authenticated user owns') plus the side effect on the mirrored calendar event, and explicitly distinguishes itself from sibling delete_event and implies the log_food/update_food context. An agent can identify this without opening any schema.

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?

Explicit when-to-use ('Prefer this over delete_event for meals logged via log_food'), when-not (unknown or other-user food_id returns an error), and the full mandatory preview-then-confirm sequence including which arguments to pass to preview_destructive_change and delete_food. Nothing is left to inference.

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

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.