Skip to main content
Glama

Rekvira: EU regulation pinpoints for compliance AI

by com.rekvira
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Delete a private playbook

delete_workflow
DestructiveIdempotent

Delete one private workflow for this trial_id. It cannot delete a shipped playbook or a draft owned by another trial.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
sessionNoThe `session` value the sign-in returned. Pass it on every call in this conversation, so the sign-in survives however this client handles connections; omit it when the user connected with Sign in (OAuth) or a key.
trial_idNotrial_id returned by connect()
workflow_idNoId of your private workflow to delete

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / session
      Added value: +{
+  "anyOf": [
+    {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    {
+      "type": "null"
+    }
+  ],
+  "default": null,
+  "description": "The `session` value the sign-in returned. Pass it on every call in this conversation, so the sign-in survives however this client handles connections; omit it when the user connected with Sign in (OAuth) or a key.",
+  "title": "Session"
+}
  2. First observed

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already mark destructiveHint true and readOnlyHint false; the description reinforces this and adds behavioral constraints beyond annotations: limitation to private workflows, trial-scoping, and exclusion of shipped/other-trial items. No contradiction with the annotations is present.

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?

Two compact sentences with no filler: the first sentence gives the action and scope, the second gives the constraints. Every word earns its place.

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?

For a simple destructive delete with no output schema, the description plus annotations and fully documented parameters provide enough context to call the tool correctly. It does not discuss response behavior, but that is not required without an output schema.

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 schema already explains session, trial_id, and workflow_id. The description adds meaning beyond the schema by clarifying that workflow_id refers to the caller's private workflow and that deletion is scoped to the given trial_id.

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 action ('Delete'), resource ('one private workflow'), and scope ('for this trial_id'), and explicitly rules out shipped playbooks and drafts owned by another trial. This clearly differentiates it from sibling tools like save_workflow, publish_workflow, and get_workflow.

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 conveys when to use the tool: to delete a single private workflow owned by the current trial. It also provides explicit exclusions (cannot delete shipped playbooks or drafts owned by another trial), helping an agent predict valid use. It does not name an alternative tool, but no delete-specific sibling exists.

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

All Rekvira: EU regulation pinpoints for compliance AI toolsInspect
Try in Browser
One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources