Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Gemmein

by com.gemmein
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Development: delete a view

dev_delete_view
DestructiveIdempotent

Deletes one view's recipe from Development — the dashboard's own delete, at once, with no approval; the collection and its records are untouched, only the view's recipe goes. Never Live, even by request: a view's recipe reaches Live only through promotion, which adds and updates views and never removes one, so a view promoted once stays in Live for good. put_view makes the Development view again. On the founder's Logs.

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": {
      "name": "<name>"
    },
    "name": "dev_delete_view"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameYesthe view's own name

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Added

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint and the non-read-only, idempotent profile, so the description's added value is the destruction boundary: collection and records are untouched, only the recipe is removed, and Live is unaffected. It does not mention permissions or rate limits, keeping it short of a 5.

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 destructive action and its scope are front-loaded, and the Live/promotion sentences earn their place by preventing a wrong assumption. The phrasing is somewhat verbose ('Never Live, even by request', 'for good'), which costs a point but not comprehension.

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 single-parameter destructive tool with no output schema, an agent has everything needed: what is deleted, what is preserved, that Live is unaffected, and how to undo it via put_view.

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 coverage is 100% with a single documented 'name' parameter, so the schema does the work. The description adds no format, naming convention, or lookup guidance beyond saying it is 'the view's own name', which is baseline.

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 and resource ('Deletes one view's recipe from Development') and immediately bounds scope ('only the view's recipe goes'). An agent can distinguish it from put_view, view_edit, and live_view 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?

Explicitly says the call is immediate with no approval, rules out Live 'even by request', and names put_view as the way to recreate the view. It also explains that promotion never removes a view, which closes the obvious alternative path an agent might assume exists.

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

All Gemmein toolsInspect
Try in Browser
Claude Code, inside the Godot 4 editorFlockbay puts an AI agent in the real Godot 4 editor: it writes GDScript, runs your game and fixes what breaks. Free, or bring your own Claude Code or Codex.flockbay.comAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources