Skip to main content
Glama

Remove an item

remove_item
Destructive

Deletes an item from a list entirely, as if it had never been added. This is the tool for an item the user no longer wants: 'take milk off the list', 'I don't need the eggs after all'.

It is one of four tools that take an item off a list, and they differ by reason. check_off_item marks an item as bought and keeps it on the list. out_of_item moves an item from the pantry onto the shopping list. consume_items records that pantry items were used up while cooking. This one simply deletes, leaving no record.

Matching is loose, so 'milk' matches 'whole milk'. When several items match, the closest one is removed. Returns the removed item and the list it came from, and reports an error without changing anything when nothing matches.

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": "remove_item"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameYesItem name to delete, as the user said it, e.g. 'milk'. Matched loosely against the names on the list.
listIdNoWhich list to remove from, using an id from search_lists. Omit to use the user's current shopping list, which is almost always what they mean.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / listId / description
      Previous value: -"Optional list id. Defaults to the user's current shopping list."New value: +"Which list to remove from, using an id from search_lists. Omit to use the user's current shopping list, which is almost always what they mean."
    • changedInput schema / properties / name / description
      Previous value: -"Item name to remove, e.g. 'milk'."New value: +"Item name to delete, as the user said it, e.g. 'milk'. Matched loosely against the names on the list."
  2. First observed

TDQS

A4.9/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations cover the destructive/readOnly profile, and the description adds real behavior beyond them: deletion leaves no record, matching is loose, the closest match wins when several match, and an error is returned with no state change when nothing matches. That is exactly the mutation context an agent needs.

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?

Front-loaded with the core action, then differentiation, then matching/error semantics. Three short paragraphs, each carrying distinct information with no padding.

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?

No output schema exists, and the description compensates by stating what is returned ('the removed item and the list it came from') and how failure behaves. For a two-parameter destructive tool, an agent has everything needed to call it correctly.

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

Parameters4/5

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

Schema coverage is 100%, so the description needn't restate the parameters, but it adds matching semantics ('milk' matches 'whole milk', closest match removed) that go beyond the schema's 'matched loosely' note. The listId default is already documented in the schema, so no extra credit there.

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 an item from a list entirely') and immediately frames it against the three sibling removal tools (check_off_item, out_of_item, consume_items), so an agent can pick it without opening any 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?

Explicit when-to-use framing ('an item the user no longer wants') plus concrete utterances ('take milk off the list'), and it enumerates each alternative removal tool with the reason that selects it. Nothing is left to inference.

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

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources