Skip to main content
Glama

Sweeppea MCP

by com.sweeppea.mcp

delete_group

DestructiveIdempotent

Permanently delete a group from a sweepstakes. Use fetch_sweepstakes first to get the sweepstakes_token, then fetch_groups to get the group_token. WARNING: Cannot delete primary groups, locked groups, or groups with participants.

delete_group

When to use

Permanently delete a group from a sweepstakes. Use fetch_sweepstakes first to get the sweepstakes_token, then fetch_groups to get the group_token. WARNING: Cannot delete primary groups, locked groups, or groups with participants.

Pre-calls required

  1. fetch_sweepstakes if the user gave you a sweepstakes name instead of a token

Parameters to validate before calling

  • sweepstakes_token (string, required) — The sweepstakes token (UUID format)

  • group_token (string, required) — The group token to delete (UUID format)

Notes

  • DESTRUCTIVE — IRREVERSIBLE. Always confirm with the user before calling. Explain what will be lost.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
group_tokenYesThe group token to delete (UUID format)
sweepstakes_tokenYesThe sweepstakes token (UUID format)

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Discloses destructive and irreversible nature, expanding on the destructiveHint annotation. Adds specific constraints (primary groups, locked groups, groups with participants) and a confirmation requirement, going beyond annotation data. No contradiction with annotations.

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 verbose and redundant, repeating the same opening sentence in the 'When to use' section. While it uses clear section headings, the duplication adds unnecessary length.

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?

Covers prerequisites, deletion constraints, and user confirmation etiquette. No output schema exists, but for a destructive tool the operational context provided is sufficient; could benefit from noting expected response type but is generally complete.

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 already fully describes both parameters with UUID format. The description repeats this but adds valuable context on how to obtain the tokens via fetch_sweepstakes and fetch_groups, elevating practical understanding above schema alone.

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?

Clearly states 'Permanently delete a group from a sweepstakes' with a specific verb and resource. Differentiates from sibling deletion tools like delete_sweepstakes and delete_participant by explicitly targeting groups.

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?

Provides explicit 'When to use' section and required pre-calls (fetch_sweepstakes, fetch_groups). Includes warnings about groups that cannot be deleted and instructs to always confirm with the user, offering strong usage context.

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

All Sweeppea MCP toolsInspect
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

A3.6/5.0
Disambiguation4/5

Most tools follow a clear resource+action pattern (fetch_* for lists, get_* for single items, create/update/delete for writes), making them distinguishable. A few near-overlaps exist (fetch_billing_transactions vs fetch_wallet_transactions, draw_winners vs schedule_drawing) but the descriptions clarify the boundaries.

Naming Consistency4/5

Tool names consistently use snake_case verb_noun, with fetch_ for list operations and get_ for single-item retrieval. Some verb variation (add_participant, count_participants, draw_winners, schedule_drawing) deviates from the dominant create/fetch/update/delete pattern but remains predictable and readable.

Tool Count1/5

With 83 tools, this is far beyond a well-scoped server (typically 3-15, with 25+ considered too many). Even though the platform has broad functionality, the sheer number of tools creates significant agent confusion and selection overhead.

Completeness4/5

The sweepstakes domain is thoroughly covered: lifecycle management, participants, groups, rules, drawings, winners, calendar, notes, todos, tickets, surveys, invoices, billing, files, and entry settings. A few minor gaps exist (e.g., no general participant field update, no archive action) but the surface is remarkably complete for its scope.

Resources