Flash

delete_deck

Destructive

Permanently delete a deck, every subdeck under it (Parent::Child names) and all their cards. First call returns decks_affected, the exact affected card IDs/count and confirm_token without deleting. Name every affected deck to the user, ask once, then repeat the same deck and token. Tokens last ten minutes across reconnects. A changed card or subdeck requires a fresh confirmation. Completed retries return the original result.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`deck`	Yes	Deck name.
`confirm_token`	No	Omit on the first call; pass back the token the first call returned, after the user has confirmed.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`note`	No
`deleted`	Yes
`pending`	Yes
`card_ids`	Yes
`expires_ms`	No
`deck_totals`	Yes
`confirm_token`	No
`cards_affected`	Yes
`decks_affected`	Yes	A deck deletion: the decks that go, by name, the deck first and then the decks under it. Empty for a deletion of cards.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed2 schema fields changedSep 19, 2026

addedOutput schema / properties / decks_affected

Added value: +{
+  "description": "A deck deletion: the decks that go, by name, the deck first and\nthen the decks under it. Empty for a deletion of cards.",
+  "items": {
+    "type": "string"
+  },
+  "type": "array"
+}

changedOutput schema / required

Previous value: -[
-  "deleted",
-  "pending",
-  "cards_affected",
-  "card_ids",
-  "deck_totals"
-]New value: +[
+  "deleted",
+  "pending",
+  "cards_affected",
+  "card_ids",
+  "decks_affected",
+  "deck_totals"
+]

Changed7 schema fields changedSep 19, 2026

addedOutput schema / properties / card_ids

Added value: +{
+  "items": {
+    "format": "int64",
+    "type": "integer"
+  },
+  "type": "array"
+}

removedOutput schema / properties / cards_affected / description

Removed value: -"Cards this deletion removes (removed, once `deleted` is true)."

addedOutput schema / properties / deck_totals

Added value: +{
+  "items": {
+    "maxItems": 2,
+    "minItems": 2,
+    "prefixItems": [
+      {
+        "format": "int64",
+        "type": "integer"
+      },
+      {
+        "format": "uint32",
+        "minimum": 0,
+        "type": "integer"
+      }
+    ],
+    "type": "array"
+  },
+  "type": "array"
+}

removedOutput schema / properties / deleted / description

Removed value: -"True only after a confirmed call removed the target."

addedOutput schema / properties / expires_ms

Added value: +{
+  "format": "int64",
+  "type": [
+    "integer",
+    "null"
+  ]
+}

removedOutput schema / properties / pending / description

Removed value: -"True when this call recorded the request and is waiting for the\nperson's yes; `confirm_token` is set and nothing was removed."

changedOutput schema / required

Previous value: -[
-  "deleted",
-  "pending",
-  "cards_affected"
-]New value: +[
+  "deleted",
+  "pending",
+  "cards_affected",
+  "card_ids",
+  "deck_totals"
+]

First observedSep 9, 2026

TDQS

A4.8/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations only indicate destructiveHint=true, but the description goes far beyond that by disclosing the two-phase confirmation flow, that the first call performs no deletion, that tokens last ten minutes, that changed data invalidates confirmation, and that completed retries return the original result. This is exemplary behavioral disclosure for 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?

Every sentence earns its place: the effect, the confirmation protocol, token lifetime, invalidation conditions, and retry behavior are all covered without repetition. The description is dense but not bloated, and the most important destructive scope is front-loaded.

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?

Given the tool's destructive complexity and the existence of an output schema, the description is remarkably complete. It explains what the first call returns, how confirmation works, how long tokens last, what invalidates a confirmation, and what retries return. Nothing essential for safe invocation is missing.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters5/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Even though the schema already describes both parameters, the description adds critical semantic meaning: deck is the root of a hierarchy, confirm_token must be omitted on the first call and echoed back after confirmation. This protocol-level guidance materially helps an agent invoke the tool correctly.

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: 'Permanently delete a deck, every subdeck under it (Parent::Child names) and all their cards.' This clearly distinguishes the tool from siblings like delete_cards or archive_deck by scope and permanence. It leaves no ambiguity about what operation the tool performs.

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?

The description provides a clear call pattern: first call without a token, then repeat with the returned confirm_token after user confirmation. It implicitly distinguishes this hierarchy-level deletion from individual-card deletion, though it does not explicitly name alternatives such as delete_cards or archive_deck.

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

All Flash 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.