Foliyo

Revoke a recipient link

revoke_recipient

DestructiveIdempotent

Disable one personal link, preserving its history and other recipients. A personal link identifies the reader; it is not their access. Anyone who knows the page PIN, or any page with no gate, can still open the page without it. To lock a person out, also change the PIN (and give the new one to the remaining readers) or use an email/domain gate, and tell the user this rather than saying the person can no longer open the page.

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": {
      "id": "<id>",
      "recipientId": "<recipientId>"
    },
    "name": "revoke_recipient"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`id`	Yes
`recipientId`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedOct 26, 2026
- removedInput schema / additionalProperties
```
Removed value: -false
```
First observedSep 14, 2026

TDQS

A4.1/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations declare destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=true, and the description adds genuinely non-derivable behavior: history and other recipients survive, and revocation does not remove access for anyone holding the PIN or on an ungated page. That is exactly the context an agent needs to avoid a wrong claim to the user.

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?

The effect is front-loaded in the first clause, followed by the caveats. It is dense but every sentence carries operational weight; only the closing instruction about wording is mildly over-specified.

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 destructive two-parameter mutation with no output schema, the behavioral picture is well covered. The remaining gap is parameter identification, which neither the schema nor the description resolves.

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 0%, so the description carries the burden. It establishes the domain concepts (one personal link, other recipients, the page) that let an agent infer recipientId is the link and id is the page, but it never ties those concepts to the parameter names or gives formats. Partial compensation.

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?

Names a specific verb and resource ('Disable one personal link') and bounds the effect ('preserving its history and other recipients'), which implicitly separates it from the delete_* siblings that remove objects outright. It stops short of naming a sibling, but the scope is unambiguous.

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?

Explicitly states what this tool does NOT achieve and what to do instead (change the PIN, use an email/domain gate), plus guidance on how to phrase the outcome to the user. No sibling tool is named for the alternative path, which keeps it from a 5.

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

All Foliyo tools Inspect

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

Need Help?