Skip to main content
Glama

Red by Big Red Cloud

Delete Customer

brc_delete_customer
Destructive

Deletes a BRC customer by id. Requires a valid routeToken issued for the matching action workflow. The token remains valid through lookup, preview and the permitted transaction. Placeholder tokens are invalid. A routeToken does not bypass preview or explicit-confirmation requirements. A call without confirmWrite: true returns confirmation_required and a payload preview. confirmWrite: true applies the previewed change after explicit confirmation. Passing preflight is not confirmation.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYescustomer id.
routeTokenYesOpaque routeToken from brc_route_request for this action workflow. Required for transactional tools. Routing permission only — does not replace preview-before-posting or confirmWrite.
companyNameYesCompany context name, for example YOUR-COMPANY-NAME.
confirmWriteNoMust be true only after a plain-English preview before posting has been shown in the current conversation and the user explicitly confirmed posting (for example yes, create it / post it now / confirm). Never set true on the first call or because the user initially asked to create something. Nothing is written to Big Red Cloud until you confirm.
confirmDeleteNo
connectionRefNoOpaque Red connection reference returned by brc_confirm_company_connection. Pass this exact value on every later tool call when the MCP client rotates session ids (for example Vibe/Mistral). Keep reusing the same connectionRef after successful tool calls — do not start a new connection because a lookup returned empty or partial data. It is not an API key and does not contain credentials.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / routeToken
      Added value: +{
      +  "description": "Opaque routeToken from brc_route_request for this action workflow. Required for transactional tools. Routing permission only — does not replace preview-before-posting or confirmWrite.",
      +  "minLength": 1,
      +  "type": "string"
      +}
    • changedInput schema / required
      Previous value: -[
      -  "companyName",
      -  "id"
      -]New value: +[
      +  "companyName",
      +  "id",
      +  "routeToken"
      +]
  2. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • removedInput schema / properties / routeToken
      Removed value: -{
      -  "description": "Opaque routeToken from brc_route_request for this action workflow. Required for transactional tools. Routing permission only — does not replace preview-before-posting or confirmWrite.",
      -  "minLength": 1,
      -  "type": "string"
      -}
    • changedInput schema / required
      Previous value: -[
      -  "companyName",
      -  "id",
      -  "routeToken"
      -]New value: +[
      +  "companyName",
      +  "id"
      +]
  3. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / routeToken
      Added value: +{
      +  "description": "Opaque routeToken from brc_route_request for this action workflow. Required for transactional tools. Routing permission only — does not replace preview-before-posting or confirmWrite.",
      +  "minLength": 1,
      +  "type": "string"
      +}
    • changedInput schema / required
      Previous value: -[
      -  "companyName",
      -  "id"
      -]New value: +[
      +  "companyName",
      +  "id",
      +  "routeToken"
      +]
  4. First observed

TDQS

A4.7/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already mark destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, but the description goes well beyond by explaining token validity, placeholder invalidity, that routeToken does not bypass preview/confirmation, the confirmation_required response, and that preflight is not confirmation. No contradiction with 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?

Six dense sentences, each carrying essential information. The main action is front-loaded, and every sentence explains a required nuance without wasting words.

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?

For a destructive transactional tool with no output schema, the description covers prerequisites (routeToken, confirmWrite), the confirmation flow, the non-confirmation nature of preflight, and the expected response (confirmation_required with payload preview). Nothing critical 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 83%, so the schema already documents most parameters. The description adds crucial behavioral meaning for routeToken and confirmWrite, explaining their interplay and the exact confirmation requirement — value not present in the schema.

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 opens with 'Deletes a BRC customer by id' — a specific verb, resource, and mechanism. This clearly distinguishes it from the many other brc_delete_* tools in the sibling list, which target different entities.

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 description gives explicit conditions for use: requires a valid routeToken, the token's lifecycle, the invalidity of placeholders, and the exact confirmWrite semantics. It does not explicitly name alternatives or when not to use the tool, but for a delete transaction the workflow guidance is unusually precise.

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.