Skip to main content
Glama

remove_govuk_watch

Destructive

TRIAL/PAID KEY: Stop monitoring a page under your key; removing it does not necessarily remove previously stored snapshots.

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": {
      "url": "<url>"
    },
    "name": "remove_govuk_watch"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
urlYesFull canonical https://www.gov.uk/ URL for a supported Content API page.
api_keyNoOptional UKSI API key (usi_...). Prefer supplying Authorization: Bearer KEY in MCP connection settings rather than exposing paid keys in tool calls.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With destructiveHint=true already declared, the description adds genuinely useful non-obvious behavior: removal does not delete previously stored snapshots. This goes beyond the annotation. It stops short of stating irreversibility or error behavior when the page is not currently watched.

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?

One compact sentence that front-loads the key requirement and appends the snapshot caveat. Nothing is wasted, though the 'TRIAL/PAID KEY:' prefix is slightly clunky.

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 destructive removal tool with no output schema, the description covers the key prerequisite and the key side-effect caveat (snapshots persist). Minor gaps remain around error/not-found behavior, but nothing essential is missing.

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 coverage is 100%, so both parameters (url, api_key) are already documented in the schema, including the preferred bearer-token alternative. The description adds no parameter-level detail beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb (stop monitoring / remove) and resource (a page watch) with a scope qualifier ('under your key'). It is clearly the inverse of the sibling watch_govuk_page, though it does not name that sibling explicitly.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

Provides a usage prerequisite ('TRIAL/PAID KEY'), which tells the agent when the tool is callable, but gives no guidance on when to prefer it over siblings such as list_my_watches (to find the URL) or watch_govuk_page. Usage is only implied.

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