Skip to main content
Glama

CustomerDashboard

by io.customerdashboard

Delete a widget

delete_widget
Destructive

Permanently delete a widget. Calling this without confirm returns a preview. This cannot be undone.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
viewIdYesView id.
confirmNoSet to true only after the user has seen what will be deleted and explicitly agreed. Calling without it returns a preview instead of deleting.
widgetIdYesWidget id.
confirmNameNoThe exact current name of the item being deleted, copied from the preview. Required alongside confirm.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

The description adds meaningful behavioral detail beyond the destructiveHint annotation: calling without confirm returns a preview, deletion is permanent, and it cannot be undone. This is exactly the kind of context an agent needs before invoking a destructive operation.

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?

Two short, information-dense sentences. The most critical safety information (permanence and preview behavior) is front-loaded, with no filler or redundant content.

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?

Given the destructive annotation, the schema fully documents parameters, and no output schema is expected, the description covers the essential operational flow: preview first, confirm explicitly, irreversible deletion. The agent has enough context to invoke this tool correctly.

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 description coverage is 100%, and the schema already explains the confirm parameter and the preview behavior. The description does not add additional parameter-level meaning beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 uses a specific verb ('permanently delete') and resource ('a widget'), clearly distinguishing this from sibling delete tools for other entities like views or dashboards. The irreversibility is stated up front, reinforcing the purpose.

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?

Usage is implied: use this when deleting a widget. However, the description does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use it, relying on the resource-specific name rather than offering direct guidance against using sibling delete tools.

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

All CustomerDashboard 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

A3.9/5.0
Disambiguation4/5

Most tools target a distinct resource+action pair, and descriptions explicitly cross-reference related tools (e.g. update_dashboard points to set_dashboard_theme and publish_dashboard). A few pairs remain close enough to cause hesitation—set_widget_layout vs update_widget's position parameter, and get_started vs get_platform_overview—but their descriptions do separate them.

Naming Consistency4/5

Tool names consistently follow verb_noun snake_case with clear resource nouns like customer, dashboard, widget, and data_source. Minor deviations exist between add_* and create_* for creation operations, and set_* versus update_* for mutations, but the overall pattern is still predictable.

Tool Count2/5

With 42 tools, the surface is much larger than the 16-25 range that already feels heavy, and several onboarding/catalog helpers (get_started, get_platform_overview, list_plans_and_limits, list_supported_data_connectors, list_widget_types) add to the count. Each tool has a distinct job, but the set would benefit from consolidation or splitting into focused sub-servers.

Completeness4/5

Core lifecycle coverage is strong: dashboards, views, widgets, data sources, customers, and publishing all have create/read/update/delete where relevant, plus test/preview/validation tools. Obvious gaps are customer-user management beyond create/delete (no password reset/update) and no direct way to move a widget between views, but agents can work around these.

Resources