fynk MCP

Delete template signature block

delete-template-signature-block

DestructiveIdempotent

Delete a signature block from a template.

Use this tool when:

The user explicitly asks to remove a signature block (a party's signing slot) from a template

The party the signature block belonged to remains on the template; only the signing slot is removed. Use get-template-info with include=["signature_blocks"] to discover the signature blocks on a template and their UUIDs.

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": {
      "template_uuid": "<template_uuid>",
      "signature_block_uuid": "<signature_block_uuid>"
    },
    "name": "delete-template-signature-block"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`template_uuid`	Yes	UUID of the template the signature block belongs to
`signature_block_uuid`	Yes	UUID of the signature block to delete (use get-template-info with include=["signature_blocks"] to find it)

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`deleted_signature_block`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedOct 20, 2026

TDQS

A3.9/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, idempotentHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, so the safety profile is covered structurally. The description adds genuinely new behavioral context by stating that the party remains on the template and only the signing slot is removed, which prevents a plausible wrong mental model of the mutation.

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 core action, then a short conditional bullet, then the scope caveat and discovery hint. Every element earns its place, though the discovery hint partly repeats schema text.

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

Completeness4/5

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

An output schema exists, so return values need not be described, and annotations cover destructiveness and idempotency. The description supplies the prerequisite discovery workflow and the non-obvious effect on the party. It lacks any mention of failure modes (e.g. missing or already-deleted UUID), but is otherwise sufficient to call correctly.

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 100%, so both UUID parameters are already documented in the schema. The description's discovery hint (get-template-info with include=["signature_blocks"]) duplicates the schema's own parenthetical rather than adding new syntax or format meaning. Baseline 3 applies.

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 first sentence states a specific verb and resource: 'Delete a signature block from a template.' It further disambiguates scope by clarifying that only the signing slot is removed while the party stays, which distinguishes it from sibling delete-template-party. It does not explicitly name that sibling, keeping it just 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 Guidelines4/5

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

It gives an explicit 'Use this tool when' condition: the user explicitly asks to remove a signature block. It also routes the agent to get-template-info with include=["signature_blocks"] to discover UUIDs. There is no explicit 'when not to use' or named alternative for related deletions, so 4 rather than 5.

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

All fynk MCP 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?