Skip to main content
Glama

local-mcp

by com.local-mcp

Delete Reminder Folder

delete_reminder_folder
Destructive

Deletes an Apple Reminders list AND all reminders inside it — cannot be undone. Pass the list name (or list_id from get_reminder_folders). Requires confirm=true.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameNoList name to delete (or pass list_id)
confirmNoMust be true to delete
list_idNoList identifier from get_reminder_folders (alternative to name)

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already mark destructiveHint=true, but the description adds significant context: it explicitly says 'cannot be undone' and that all reminders inside are deleted, which goes beyond just 'destructive'. It also specifies the confirmation requirement, making the irreversible behavior transparent. No contradiction with annotations exists.

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?

The description is two sentences that front-load the action and critical warning, then provide usage details. Every clause adds value: what gets deleted, irreversibility, how to identify the target, and the confirmation gate.

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?

Given the presence of an output schema, the description doesn't need to explain return values. It covers purpose, scope, irreversibility, identifier options, and confirmation requirement. It lacks only edge-case behavior like conflicting name and list_id, but those are outside typical expectations.

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?

The schema already provides 100% coverage for all three parameters. The description reinforces the relationship between name and list_id as alternatives and points to get_reminder_folders as the source for list_id, adding a small sourcing hint. However, it mostly repeats schema information, so it meets but doesn't exceed the baseline for schema-covered params.

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 clearly states the tool deletes an Apple Reminders list and all reminders within it, using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from sibling delete_reminder by emphasizing the cascading deletion and irreversibility.

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 provides clear context: this deletes an entire list, not just a single reminder, and cannot be undone. It instructs the agent to pass a name or list_id (sourced from get_reminder_folders) and requires confirm=true. While it doesn't explicitly name alternative tools like delete_reminder, the cascade warning implies when this is appropriate.

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

All local-mcp toolsInspect
Try in Browser
RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A3.5/5.0
Disambiguation3/5

Many tools are clearly distinct per app (e.g., chrome_*, safari_*, m365_*), but there is notable overlap between generic file tools like `file_list` and `finder_list`, both listing files; `search_contacts` and `list_contacts` serve similar purposes; `report_friction` and `report_problem` both send feedback to the team. The large number of tools with similar purposes in different domains creates moderate ambiguity for an agent.

Naming Consistency4/5

The naming convention is very consistent overall: most tools follow a `{app}_action` or `verb_noun` pattern (e.g., `chrome_click`, `create_calendar_event`, `list_reminders`). There are minor deviations like `lmcp_install_upgrade` (two verbs) and `complete_omnifocus_task` vs. `complete_reminder` (inconsistent verb placement). Still, the pattern is predictable and readable across the full set.

Tool Count2/5

With 225 tools, the surface is extremely large and heavy. While it covers many distinct domains (browsers, mail, calendar, files, notes, reminders, video editing, web automation, etc.), the sheer number makes it hard to navigate and likely includes many rarely-used tools. This is far beyond the well-scoped range of 3-15 tools and feels excessive even for a 'local everything' MCP server.

Completeness3/5

For many app integrations, the tool set provides solid CRUD coverage (e.g., Calendar has create, read, update, delete; Apple Notes has create, read, update, list, search; OmniFocus has create, list, search, complete). However, some areas are incomplete: for example, there is no tool to create a new Mail folder or delete notes. The 'web' tools lack a clear update/delete for saved sessions. The suite is broad but has notable gaps within individual domains.

Resources