ShortsIntel

Remove from a collection

remove_from_collection

Idempotent

Use when taking a Tracker (tracker_id) out of a Collection (by id or name); the Tracker keeps running and stays in its other Collections. Not for stopping the Tracker: set_tracker_state or delete_tracker. Price: Free.

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>",
      "tracker_id": "<tracker_id>"
    },
    "name": "remove_from_collection"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`collection`	Yes	The Collection, by id or name (case does not matter).
`tracker_id`	Yes	The Tracker to take out

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`tracker`	No	Untouched by the removal.
`collection`	No	A named set of Trackers of one kind.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed2 schema fields changedNov 5, 2026
- changedOutput schema / properties / collection / additionalProperties
```
Previous value: -trueNew value: +{}
```
- removedOutput schema / properties / collection / properties
```
Removed value: -{}
```

Changed1 schema field changedNov 4, 2026

changedOutput schema / (root)

Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "$schema": "http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#",
+  "additionalProperties": true,
+  "properties": {
+    "collection": {
+      "additionalProperties": true,
+      "description": "A named set of Trackers of one kind.",
+      "properties": {},
+      "type": "object"
+    },
+    "tracker": {
+      "$ref": "#/properties/collection",
+      "description": "Untouched by the removal."
+    }
+  },
+  "type": "object"
+}

First observedNov 2, 2026

TDQS

A4.2/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true and openWorldHint=false, but the description adds genuinely new behavioral context: 'the Tracker keeps running and stays in its other Collections.' That tells the agent the removal is scoped and reversible-in-effect rather than a deletion. It stops short of mentioning permissions, error behavior if the collection doesn't exist, or what the response contains (though an output schema exists).

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?

Three short lines, front-loaded with the trigger and immediately followed by the negative case. Nothing is redundant, and 'Price: Free' is a compact piece of business context rather than filler.

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 two-parameter, fully documented, annotated tool with an output schema, the description covers when to use it, when not to, and the side-effect scope. Only edge-case behavior (nonexistent collection, duplicate removal) is left unaddressed, which is a minor gap for this complexity level.

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% and both parameters are documented ('by id or name (case does not matter)', 'The Tracker to take out'), so the baseline is 3. The description restates the id-or-name affordance rather than adding new meaning such as format examples or resolution behavior on ambiguity.

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 uses a specific verb-and-resource pair ('taking a Tracker out of a Collection') and names both parameters inline, so the operation is unambiguous. It is slightly short of a 5 because the most obvious sibling, add_to_collection, is never named as the inverse operation, leaving the agent to infer the pairing.

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 opens with an explicit trigger ('Use when taking a Tracker...') and then states a clear when-not with two named alternatives: 'Not for stopping the Tracker: set_tracker_state or delete_tracker.' That is exactly the routing information an agent needs among this large sibling set.

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

All ShortsIntel 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?