Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

vote.direct

by direct.vote
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Take voters off a draft election

remove_voters
DestructiveIdempotent

Take voters off a DRAFT election in the connected account, by email address or by unit. A voter goes when their email is named, or when every unit they hold is named, so nobody loses a unit by accident; the contact book is not touched. Returns how many were taken off and how many of those named are not on the list, never the rows, and the updated price.

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": {
      "election": "<election>"
    },
    "name": "remove_voters"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
unitsNoUnits, lots or address labels whose voters to take off, e.g. "Unit 4B".
emailsNoEmail addresses of the voters to take off.
electionYesThe draft's id or slug.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Added

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=true, so the bar is lower, but the description still adds value: it scopes the destruction ("nobody loses a unit by accident; the contact book is not touched") and documents the return shape (counts and updated price, never rows). It does not discuss permission requirements, which would be the remaining useful addition.

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?

Front-loaded with the verb and resource, and the dense clauses each carry distinct information (removal rule, side-effect scope, return shape). It is a touch long and semicolon-heavy but no sentence is 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?

With no output schema, the description carries the return-value burden and does so, and annotations cover the safety profile. Remaining gaps are minor: no mention of error cases (e.g. non-draft election) or the 5000-item cap, but nothing essential for correct invocation is missing.

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 the baseline is 3, but the description adds meaning the terse schema fields lack: how emails and units combine (a voter goes when their email is named, or when every unit they hold is named) and the implication that unmatched names are reported. That is genuine semantic value beyond the parameter descriptions.

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?

States a specific verb+resource ("Take voters off a DRAFT election") plus scope and account context. The DRAFT qualifier and the email/unit mechanism distinguish it cleanly from the sibling add_voters and from publish_election without needing either schema.

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?

Gives clear conditions for the tool: it applies to draft elections and removes voters named by email or by unit. It also defines the removal trigger precisely (email named, or every unit named), which is real usage guidance. It stops short of explicitly naming add_voters as the inverse operation or what to do outside a draft.

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

All vote.direct 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