Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Sliq

by com.getsliq
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Cancel gift

cancel_gift
Destructive

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": {
      "agent_id": "<agent_id>",
      "gift_id": "<gift_id>"
    },
    "name": "cancel_gift"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
gift_idYesThe gift's `id`, from the prospect's `gifts` on a `query_prospects` row or the card's `id` in `get_pending_approvals`.
agent_idYesThe gift's `agent_id`, the agent (campaign) it was queued in.
on_behalf_ofNoA teammate's email, or an agency client's from list_agency_clients, to run this call in that account: their agents, settings, connected accounts, and credits. Omit it to act on your own account.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / on_behalf_of / description
      Previous value: -"An agency client's email, from list_agency_clients, to run this call in that client's account: their agents, settings, connected accounts, and credits. Omit it to act on your own account."New value: +"A teammate's email, or an agency client's from list_agency_clients, to run this call in that account: their agents, settings, connected accounts, and credits. Omit it to act on your own account."
  2. Added

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations only declare destructiveHint=true; the description adds substantive behavior: the person is not removed from the campaign, gifts already ordered, failed, delivered or cancelled are left untouched, and the return contract (`success` plus an `error` sentence) is disclosed. This is exactly the state-mutation context an agent needs before a destructive call.

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 a summary and return section, so the reader sees purpose and outcome first. The eligibility sentence is dense with nested clauses ('including one its recipient returned with an address') that slow parsing, but each clause carries real state-selection information rather than filler.

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 state-mutating tool with no output schema, the description covers eligibility, side effects on campaign membership, and failure reporting. Combined with the annotations and fully documented schema, an agent has everything needed to call it correctly and to predict the result.

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%, with gift_id's provenance (`query_prospects` gifts or `get_pending_approvals` card id) and `on_behalf_of` account context already documented in the schema. The description adds no parameter-level meaning beyond that, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 ('Skip or cancel a gift') plus the precise eligibility scope ('nothing has been ordered for yet'). It also distinguishes itself from the sibling `update_prospect` by contrasting the outcome: the person stays in the campaign on the gift's flow step rather than being removed.

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?

Explicitly frames the trigger ('when the user asks you to') and enumerates the two eligible situations: a card awaiting approval and a link awaiting its recipient. It names the alternative (`update_prospect`) and its different effect, but does not spell out the routing to `queue_gift` for the send case, so a small inference remains.

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

All Sliq toolsInspect
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