Skip to main content
Glama

Kema Invoice

by com.kema-studio
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Delete company

delete_company
Destructive

Soft-delete a client company. Blocked when contacts are still linked to it. Call with confirm:true to delete; without it, returns a preview.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
confirmNoMust be true to delete. Omit/false to preview only.
company_idYesThe company UUID to delete.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idNoDeleted company UUID (after confirm:true).
noteNoNext-step guidance, present on preview responses.
previewNoTrue when the call was a preview (confirm omitted or false): nothing was changed.
would_deleteNoCompany that would be deleted (preview only).

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / company_id / description
      Added value: +"The company UUID to delete."
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "$schema": "http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#",
+  "additionalProperties": false,
+  "properties": {
+    "id": {
+      "description": "Deleted company UUID (after confirm:true).",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "note": {
+      "description": "Next-step guidance, present on preview responses.",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "preview": {
+      "description": "True when the call was a preview (confirm omitted or false): nothing was changed.",
+      "type": "boolean"
+    },
+    "would_delete": {
+      "additionalProperties": false,
+      "description": "Company that would be deleted (preview only).",
+      "properties": {
+        "email": {
+          "anyOf": [
+            {
+              "type": "string"
+            },
+            {
+              "type": "null"
+            }
+          ],
+          "description": "Billing email."
+        },
+        "id": {
+          "description": "Company UUID.",
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        "name": {
+          "description": "Display name.",
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        "tax_id": {
+          "anyOf": [
+            {
+              "type": "string"
+            },
+            {
+              "type": "null"
+            }
+          ],
+          "description": "VAT number."
+        }
+      },
+      "required": [
+        "id",
+        "name",
+        "email",
+        "tax_id"
+      ],
+      "type": "object"
+    }
+  },
+  "type": "object"
+}
  2. First observed

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false. The description adds valuable behavior: it's a soft-delete (reversible), it has a two-phase preview/confirm flow, and it is blocked under certain conditions. This significantly exceeds what annotations alone convey.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the core action, then the blocking condition and confirm behavior. Zero filler and each clause earns its place.

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?

With an output schema present, return format is covered. The description covers the essential behavioral details: soft-delete, blocking condition, and the preview/confirm mechanism. Nothing an agent needs to call it correctly is missing.

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%, and both parameters already have clear descriptions (company_id as UUID, confirm with its preview/delete semantics). The tool description adds no new parameter meaning beyond restating the confirm behavior, so it stays at the baseline for full schema coverage.

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 the specific verb 'soft-delete' and identifies the resource as a 'client company', which immediately distinguishes it from other delete tools like delete_invoice. It also states the blocking condition (contacts linked), adding precision beyond a generic 'delete'.

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 explains the prerequisite condition: deletion is blocked when contacts are still linked. This gives an agent guidance on when the operation will fail, though it doesn't explicitly name alternatives or contrast with other delete tools. The confirm:true requirement is also a clear usage guideline.

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

All Kema Invoice 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