Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Wishpile

by com.wishpile
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Delete a gift list

delete_gift_list
DestructiveIdempotent

Deletes one of the signed-in person's gift lists (a shopping list for an occasion, such as "Christmas 2026"), along with the names and gift ideas tracked on it. This can't be undone. An empty list is deleted right away. If the list still has names or gifts on it, the first call changes nothing and says what's on it; call again with confirm true to go ahead. A gift that came from claiming a wishlist item frees up that item again. A wishlist group planned from the list is kept.

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": {
      "list_id": "<list_id>"
    },
    "name": "delete_gift_list"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
confirmNoTrue once the person has agreed to delete a list that isn't empty
list_idYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

No schema history has been recorded yet.

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already flag destructiveHint and idempotentHint, and the description adds substantial context beyond them: irreversibility, the confirm handshake and why it exists, and the non-obvious side effects (claimed wishlist items are freed, a planned wishlist group survives). These downstream consequences are exactly the kind of behavior an agent cannot infer from the schema or annotations.

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?

The opening sentence front-loads what is deleted and what goes with it, followed immediately by 'This can't be undone,' so the destructive nature lands before the mechanics. Each later sentence carries a distinct behavioral fact (immediate delete, confirm handshake, item freeing, group retention) with 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?

No output schema and destructive annotations mean the description carries the burden of explaining errors, side effects, and the confirmation loop, and it covers all of them. For a two-parameter destructive tool, an agent has everything needed to call it safely and interpret the first-call refusal.

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?

The schema documents confirm (50% coverage) and the description reinforces its use in the two-step flow, which is genuinely helpful for a destructive confirmation gate. However, list_id is undocumented in both places and the description never says how to obtain a valid list_id, leaving the required parameter without added meaning.

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 gives a specific verb and resource ('Deletes ... gift lists') and even defines the resource ('a shopping list for an occasion, such as "Christmas 2026"'), so an agent knows exactly what is being removed. It stops short of naming a sibling such as delete_wishlist or update_gift_list, so the boundary between deleting a gift list and deleting a wishlist must be inferred.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The two-phase flow is spelled out precisely: empty lists go immediately, non-empty lists require a second call with confirm true, and the first call returns a description of the contents. What is missing is guidance on choosing this tool over alternatives like update_gift_list or delete_wishlist, but the operational when-to-use conditions are clear.

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

All Wishpile toolsInspect
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