Skip to main content
Glama

Delete a collection

delete_collection
DestructiveIdempotent

Use when removing a Collection, by id or name. Not for taking one Tracker out: remove_from_collection. Not for pausing its Trackers: act_on_collection. Price: Free. Its Trackers keep running unless delete_trackers=true, which also deletes members in no other Collection (their Change Reports stay readable with get_changes). The answer lists the Trackers still being charged.

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": {
      "collection": "<collection>"
    },
    "name": "delete_collection"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
collectionYesThe Collection, by id or name (case does not matter).
delete_trackersNoAlso delete member Trackers in no other Collection. Off by default: they keep running.

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
collectionNoThe Collection as it was.
deleted_trackersNoDeleted with it; only with `delete_trackers=true`.
trackers_still_activeNoFormer members still active, and so still charged each cycle.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / delete_trackers / description
      Previous value: -"Also delete member Trackers that are in no other Collection. Off by default: Trackers keep running."New value: +"Also delete member Trackers in no other Collection. Off by default: they keep running."
  2. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • changedOutput schema / properties / collection / additionalProperties
      Previous value: -trueNew value: +{}
    • removedOutput schema / properties / collection / properties
      Removed value: -{}
  3. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
      +  "$schema": "http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#",
      +  "additionalProperties": true,
      +  "properties": {
      +    "collection": {
      +      "additionalProperties": true,
      +      "description": "The Collection as it was.",
      +      "properties": {},
      +      "type": "object"
      +    },
      +    "deleted_trackers": {
      +      "description": "Deleted with it; only with `delete_trackers=true`.",
      +      "items": {
      +        "$ref": "#/properties/collection"
      +      },
      +      "type": "array"
      +    },
      +    "trackers_still_active": {
      +      "description": "Former members still active, and so still charged each cycle.",
      +      "items": {
      +        "$ref": "#/properties/collection"
      +      },
      +      "type": "array"
      +    }
      +  },
      +  "type": "object"
      +}
  4. First observed

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=true, so the description goes beyond them by explaining the blast radius: Trackers survive by default, delete_trackers=true only removes members in no other Collection, and Change Reports remain readable via get_changes. This is real consequence disclosure. It stops short of 5 only because it doesn't state whether deletion is recoverable/undoable or mention auth/permission requirements.

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 exclusion clauses are front-loaded and the destructive caveat follows logically. Slightly dense with parentheticals and a stray "Price: Free." sentence that interrupts the flow, but no filler.

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 two-param tool with an output schema and full annotations, the description covers scope, alternatives, side effects, and even what the response lists. An agent has everything needed to call it safely.

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 baseline is 3; the description earns an extra point by spelling out the downstream effect of delete_trackers (also deletes members in no other Collection, Change Reports stay readable), which the schema's one-line param description does not convey.

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 verb and resource ("removing a Collection, by id or name") and immediately names the two nearest siblings it is not — remove_from_collection and act_on_collection — so an agent can discriminate without opening schemas.

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?

Explicit when-to-use plus two explicit when-not-to-use cases with the correct alternative tool for each (single-Tracker removal vs. pausing Trackers). Nothing is left to inference about routing.

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