RetailHardHat

Delete Change Request Document

delete_change_request_document

Destructive

Use this when working with RetailHardHat documents records in the connected organization. Remove a change_request document using the application's normal file-deletion rules. No change occurs until a human approves the exact request in Settings > MCP and execute_approved_action is called. MCP approval requirements are configurable by the organization administrator; business workflow approvals always apply.

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": {
      "changeRequestId": "<changeRequestId>",
      "documentId": "<documentId>"
    },
    "name": "delete_change_request_document"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`documentId`	Yes
`changeRequestId`	Yes

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`data`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedOct 27, 2026

TDQS

B3.2/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the destructiveHint annotation, the description explains that no deletion occurs until a human approves the exact request in Settings > MCP and execute_approved_action is called, and that approval requirements are configurable by the organization administrator. This is important operational context for a destructive tool.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is not bloated and includes important approval information, but the first sentence is boilerplate and the action is not front-loaded. The core operation appears only in the second sentence.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

The approval workflow is well covered, annotations already mark the tool as destructive, and an output schema exists. However, with 0% parameter description coverage, the description does not compensate by explaining the two required UUID arguments or what 'normal file-deletion rules' entail.

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

Parameters1/5

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

The schema has two required UUID parameters with 0% description coverage, and the description does not mention changeRequestId or documentId at all. The parameter names hint at their purpose, but the description adds no meaning beyond the bare schema.

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?

The description states a specific destructive action: removing a change_request document via the application's file-deletion rules. The resource is precise enough to distinguish it from delete_change_request and other delete_*_document tools, though it does not explicitly name those siblings.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

The opening sentence gives only generic context about working with RetailHardhat document records, and the description never says when to choose this tool over adjacent options such as delete_change_request, list_change_request_documents, or read_change_request_document. Approval workflow details are behavioral, not usage-selection guidance.

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

All RetailHardHat tools Inspect

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

Need Help?