Riddle

questionBank_delete

Destructive

Deletes a question bank and every one of its items. Rejected with a QUESTION_BANK_INTERDEPENDENCY error if a Riddle in this bank's own project still references it, and BOTH VERSIONS OF A RIDDLE COUNT: the reference tracking is refreshed on every write - a publish, a duplicate, a template-use, an edit in the Creator, or a draft edit through the Builder API (riddle_builder_update and the riddle_builder_* tools) - and it looks at the draft AND, while the Riddle is published, at the live version. So adding a QuestionBank block pointing at this id is enough to protect the bank without (re)publishing, and removing that block from the draft of a published Riddle does NOT release it: the live version keeps pulling the bank until the Riddle is republished or unpublished. A successful delete therefore does mean no Riddle in the project references the bank. Two things the guard still does not cover: a validate-only call (riddle_builder_validate) writes nothing and so registers no reference, and the guard is scoped to this bank's OWN project. If the delete IS rejected, find the referencing Riddles with riddle_list/riddle_get, then either remove the QuestionBank block or repoint it at a different bank via riddle_builder_update - questionBank_riddleBlockItems can preview a specific block you already found. Irreversible once it succeeds. Tags the bank carried are cleaned up like questionBank_removeTag does it: one that nothing else uses any more is deleted from the project, one a Riddle or another bank still uses stays. Rejected for a public template id, see questionBank_templateList.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`questionBankId`	Yes	The ID of the question bank to delete.

TDQS

A4.8/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

The description greatly extends the annotations. It discloses destructiveness, irreversibility, cascade deletes, draft-vs-live reference tracking, validate-only gaps, project scoping, and tag cleanup behavior. This goes far beyond the destructiveHint and idempotentHint annotations.

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

Conciseness4/5

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

The content is dense but necessary given the complexity of the delete behavior. It front-loads the core action and then layers in reference tracking and recovery guidance. However, it is one long paragraph and would be easier to scan with better structural separation.

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?

For a destructive tool with no output schema, the description is exceptionally complete: it explains all side effects, success meaning, rejection causes, reference tracking nuances, tag cleanup, and a recovery workflow. An agent has enough information to decide when to call it and what to expect.

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?

The single parameter is already fully documented by the schema, so the baseline is 3. The description adds meaningful edge-case semantics: the ID must belong to this project's bank set, and public template IDs are rejected. This is useful but still limited because there is only one simple parameter.

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?

The first sentence states a specific verb and resource: 'Deletes a question bank and every one of its items.' The description also clearly distinguishes this from siblings like questionBank_deleteItem by emphasizing the cascade and the interdependency guard.

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?

It explicitly explains when deletion is rejected: when a Riddle references the bank, and for public template IDs. It also provides a concrete recovery alternative using riddle_list, riddle_get, and riddle_builder_update, and points to questionBank_templateList for the public-template case.

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

All Riddle tools Inspect

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

A4.1/5.0

Disambiguation5/5

Each tool has a clear, unique purpose. The riddle_builder_* variants are distinct by Riddle type, questionBank_* and riddleTemplate_* cover separate objects, and stats_* differ by scope. No two tools appear to perform the same function.

Naming Consistency4/5

Naming is largely consistent with domain prefixes (riddle_, questionBank_, riddleTemplate_, stats_, project_, palette_, reference_). Minor deviations like riddle_account_list vs. riddle_list and whoami (no prefix) and riddle_get_embed_code vs. riddle_qr_code slightly break the pattern, but overall it is predictable.

Tool Count2/5

With 62 tools, the server is far beyond the typical 3-15 well-scoped range. While each tool is functional and the breadth reflects the platform's complexity, the sheer number makes it heavy and increases the cognitive load for an agent, suggesting over-granularity.

Completeness5/5

The tool set covers the full lifecycle: create (builder variants), read (get/list), update (builder_update, rename), delete, publish/unpublish, tagging, templates, question banks, stats, projects, palettes, and reference documentation. No obvious domain operation is missing.

Resources

Need Help?