Skip to main content
Glama

Plendio price comparison

Remove products from a wishlist

remove_from_wishlist
DestructiveIdempotent

Removes products from a wishlist, given its edit link or the token at the end of it. A product that is not on the list is reported and ignored. Removing a product does not delete the list, even when it becomes empty, and a removed product can be added again. Returns the list's remaining items.

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": {
      "edit_token": "<edit_token>",
      "items": "<items>"
    },
    "name": "remove_from_wishlist"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
itemsYesThe products to remove: 1 to 50.
marketNoMarket for the urls in the answer: dk, se, de or no. Default: the market the list was made for.
edit_tokenYesThe wishlist's edit link as returned when it was created, or just the token at the end of it.

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
addedNoProduct ids put on the list.
itemsYes
notesNo
titleYesThe list's name, written by whoever made it.
marketYes
removedNoProduct ids taken off the list.
currencyNoCurrency of total_from.
recipientNoWho the list is for, written by whoever made it.
share_urlYesThe list's page on Plendio, read-only.
item_countYes
not_storedNoProducts that could not be added, with the reason.
total_fromNoSum of price_from over the available items; absent when their currencies differ or none has a price.
not_on_listNoProduct ids that were not on the list.
occasion_dateNoDay of the occasion, YYYY-MM-DD.
already_on_listNoProduct ids that were already on the list and were left as they are.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedOutput schema / properties / already_on_list / description
      Previous value: -"Product ids that were already on the list (their note was updated)."New value: +"Product ids that were already on the list and were left as they are."
  2. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • addedOutput schema / properties / occasion_date
      Added value: +{
      +  "description": "Day of the occasion, YYYY-MM-DD.",
      +  "type": "string"
      +}
    • addedOutput schema / properties / recipient
      Added value: +{
      +  "description": "Who the list is for, written by whoever made it.",
      +  "type": "string"
      +}
  3. Added

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare destructive, idempotent, non-read-only, open-world behavior, yet the description adds genuinely new facts: absent products are reported and ignored rather than erroring, the list survives becoming empty, and a removed product can be re-added. These are exactly the consequences an agent cannot derive from the annotation flags. Only the permission scope of the edit token (full write access) is left unstated.

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 short sentences, front-loaded with the action and access mechanism, then the non-obvious semantics. Every sentence contributes a distinct fact with no filler or repetition of the title.

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?

A destructive mutation tool whose annotations cover the safety profile, with a 100%-covered schema and an output schema for return values. The description supplies the important edge-case semantics; only auth/permission implications of the edit token and failure modes are 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%, including the edit_token and items fields, so the schema already carries parameter meaning. The description restates the edit-link-or-token option but adds no new syntax or constraint detail, so the baseline 3 applies.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb and resource ('Removes products from a wishlist') and adds the access mechanism ('given its edit link or the token at the end of it'), which implicitly separates it from the user-scoped remove_from_my_wishlist. It never names the sibling explicitly, so the differentiation must be inferred from the edit-token framing.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The edit-token framing implies this is the anonymous/share-link path, but the description never says when to prefer it over remove_from_my_wishlist or get_wishlist. Edge-case handling (product not on list, empty list, re-adding) is documented, but selection guidance is left implicit.

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