Dayze — Life Context

Delete Place Visit

delete_place_visit

Destructive

Preview first, 30-day undo. Delete one place_visits row (visit_id from get_place_visits or log_place_visit) without deleting its canonical place. Reviewed and reversible: first call preview_destructive_change({ tool: "delete_place_visit", arguments: { visit_id } }), which stores the exact change without applying it. After the user confirms, call delete_place_visit 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. ($0.10; API key required)

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`visit_id`	Yes	UUID of a place_visits row: visit_id from get_place_visits or log_place_visit.
`preview_id`	Yes	preview_id returned by preview_destructive_change for this tool.
`request_id`	Yes	Required idempotency key; retries return the original receipt.
`idempotency_key`	No	Alias for request_id.
`restore_window_acknowledged`	Yes	Must be true after reviewing the preview and its 30-day restore window.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`account`	No	The Dayze account this data belongs to. With more than one Dayze connection, name it in the answer.
`deleted`	Yes	Deleted place visit row.
`visit_id`	Yes
`preview_id`	No
`provenance`	No	Which connector wrote the record and which connected Dayze account received it.
`restore_id`	No	Pass to restore_change to undo within restore_window_days.
`reversible`	No
`place_visit_id`	Yes
`idempotent_replay`	No
`restore_expires_at`	No
`restore_window_days`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed2 schema fields changedOct 3, 2026

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"
+}

Changed1 schema field changedSep 28, 2026

changedInput schema / properties / visit_id / description

Previous value: -"UUID of a place_visits row returned by log_place_visit."New value: +"UUID of a place_visits row: visit_id from get_place_visits or log_place_visit."

AddedSep 27, 2026

TDQS

A4.8/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, but the description adds substantial context beyond them: a 30-day reversible undo window, the preview-then-apply contract, refusal if the record changed since preview, restore_id return, idempotency, and the $0.10 cost plus API-key requirement.

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 'Preview first, 30-day undo,' and every sentence carries operational weight. It is dense and packs cost/parenthetical detail, but no sentence is filler; slightly more compression could help.

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, multi-step tool this is complete: it covers the preview gate, confirmation flow, reversibility window, and even names the return value, despite an output schema existing. Nothing needed to invoke it correctly 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%, so each parameter is already documented. The description goes beyond that by explaining how the parameters interlock in the workflow (preview_id comes from preview_destructive_change, restore_window_acknowledged must be true, request_id ties to retries), adding real meaning over the schema alone.

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 (delete) and resource (one place_visits row) and immediately disambiguates from the sibling delete_place with 'without deleting its canonical place'. An agent can distinguish it from delete_place and delete_person without opening a 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?

Lays out an explicit when/when-not workflow: first call preview_destructive_change, then after user confirmation call this tool with preview_id. It names the exact alternative tools (preview_destructive_change, restore_change) and the conditions that select them, leaving nothing to inference.

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

All Dayze — Life Context 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.