Skip to main content
Glama

Sweeppea MCP

by com.sweeppea.mcp

delete_scheduled_drawing

DestructiveIdempotent

Delete a pending scheduled drawing. Use fetch_scheduled_drawings first to get the schedule_token. WARNING: This action cannot be undone. Only drawings with pending status can be deleted — completed or errored drawings cannot be removed. Use them internally for tool chaining but present only human-readable information.

delete_scheduled_drawing

When to use

Delete a pending scheduled drawing. Use fetch_scheduled_drawings first to get the schedule_token. WARNING: This action cannot be undone. Only drawings with pending status can be deleted — completed or errored drawings cannot be removed. Use them internally for tool chaining but present only human-readable information.

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)

  • schedule_token (string, required) — The scheduled drawing 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
schedule_tokenYesThe scheduled drawing token to delete (UUID format)
sweepstakes_tokenYesThe sweepstakes token (UUID format)

TDQS

A4.7/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

The description adds key behavioral context beyond annotations: the action is irreversible, only pending drawings are eligible, and it warns to confirm with the user before calling. This complements the destructiveHint annotation with specific consequences and guardrails.

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 organized with headers but repeats the same information: the opening paragraph duplicates the 'When to use' section, and the Notes section restates the destructive warning. It could be tightened without losing meaning.

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 delete tool with no output schema, the description covers prerequisites, status constraints, confirmation requirement, and irreversibility. It fully addresses the operational context an agent needs to safely invoke this tool.

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 baseline is 3. The description adds value by explaining that fetch_scheduled_drawings provides the schedule_token and fetch_sweepstakes resolves a sweepstakes name to a token, giving parameter provenance beyond the schema.

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 description opens with 'Delete a pending scheduled drawing', using a specific verb and resource. It clearly distinguishes this from sibling delete tools by specifying 'scheduled drawing' and the pending status requirement.

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 instructs to call fetch_scheduled_drawings first to get the schedule_token, and notes fetch_sweepstakes as a pre-call if the user provides a sweepstakes name. It also states that only pending-status drawings can be deleted, giving clear when-to-use guidance.

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