Skip to main content
Glama

local-mcp

by com.local-mcp

Recipe Delete

recipe_delete
Destructive

Use this when the user wants to remove one of THEIR saved recipes/skills (the manifests under ~/.local/share/local-mcp/recipes). Destructive with a preview gate: the first call (without confirm) shows what would be deleted; call again with confirm=true to actually delete. Bundled starter recipes can't be deleted. To modify a recipe instead, recipe_save with the same name overwrites it (upsert).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameYesRecipe name (from recipe_list).
confirmNoMust be true to actually delete. Without it, returns a preview.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameNo
statusNo'preview' when confirm was not set.
deletedNo

TDQS

A5/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Beyond annotations (destructiveHint=true), description explains two-step safety gate: first call previews deletion, second with confirm=true executes. Also notes bundled recipes are protected. No contradictions with annotations.

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?

Four sentences, front-loaded with primary use case, no wasted text. Each sentence adds essential information.

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?

Given output schema exists, description needn't detail returns. It covers usage, behavioral nuance, constraints, and sibling differentiation. Complete for a deletion tool.

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

Parameters5/5

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

Schema has 100% coverage; description adds meaning: confirm parameter behavior (preview vs actual delete), and name sourced from recipe_list. This clarifies the two-step workflow.

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?

Description clearly states the tool removes saved recipes/skills (manifests under a specific path). It distinguishes from bundeled starter recipes which cannot be deleted, and references sibling recipe_save for modification.

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 when to use ('when user wants to remove one of THEIR saved recipes/skills'), what not to use (bundled starters), and provides alternative (recipe_save for modification).

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