Skip to main content
Glama

Discard draft

discard_draft
DestructiveIdempotent

Throw away the page's unpublished draft and stop its preview URL resolving. The live page is NOT affected — if the page is published it keeps serving its current version. Use this when the user abandons a direction and wants to start over, not to "clean up" after publishing: publishing already consumes the draft. Ask the user first. The draft is the only copy of that work and it cannot be recovered.

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": {
      "pageId": "<pageId>"
    },
    "name": "discard_draft"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
pageIdYesThe page whose draft should be discarded.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4.7/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already declare destructive=true and idempotent=true, but the description goes well beyond them: the live page is unaffected, a published page keeps serving its current version, the preview URL stops resolving, and the draft is irrecoverable. That is exactly the context an agent needs before an irreversible call.

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?

Five short sentences, front-loaded with the effect, then the blast-radius clarification, then the routing guidance and the safety warning. No sentence is redundant.

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?

A destructive single-parameter tool with no output schema; the description covers what is destroyed, what is preserved, the irreversibility, and the confirmation requirement. Nothing an agent needs to call it safely 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?

There is one parameter at 100% schema description coverage, so the schema already explains pageId fully. The description reinforces that the draft belongs to 'the page' but adds no format, ID-source, or lookup detail beyond that. The baseline of 3 is appropriate here.

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?

Uses a specific verb (throw away) and resource (the page's unpublished draft), plus a concrete secondary effect (stops the preview URL resolving). It is clearly distinguishable from save_draft and publish, which appear among the siblings.

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 states when to use it (user abandons a direction and wants to start over) and when not to (not as 'clean up' after publishing, since publishing already consumes the draft). It also adds a procedural instruction, 'Ask the user first.'

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.