Skip to main content
Glama

Red by Big Red Cloud

by io.github.BigRedCloud
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Delete Nominal Journal Batch

brc_delete_nominal_journal_batch
Destructive

Deletes a nominal journal batch using its current concurrency timestamp. 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
idYesNominal Journal Batch id.
timestampYesBase64 timestamp returned by the Nominal Journal Batch, for example 7aIZQIbL3gg=.
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 the user explicitly confirms deleting this Nominal Journal Batch.
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",
-  "timestamp"
-]New value: +[
+  "companyName",
+  "id",
+  "timestamp",
+  "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",
-  "timestamp",
-  "routeToken"
-]New value: +[
+  "companyName",
+  "id",
+  "timestamp"
+]
  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",
-  "timestamp"
-]New value: +[
+  "companyName",
+  "id",
+  "timestamp",
+  "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 the tool as destructive, but the description adds substantial behavioral detail: token validity through lookup/preview/transaction, placeholder token invalidity, the confirmation_required response without confirmWrite, the meaning of confirmWrite: true, and that preflight is not confirmation. This goes well beyond the 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?

The description is front-loaded with the core action and then delivers dense, non-redundant sentences about prerequisites and confirmation behavior. Every sentence adds operational value, and nothing is wasted.

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 explains the required routeToken workflow, the confirmation flow, the meaning of missing confirmWrite, and the fact that preflight is not confirmation. This is sufficient for an agent to understand how to call the tool correctly and what to expect.

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 parameters are already documented. The description adds important semantics for routeToken and confirmWrite, explaining the token lifecycle and the confirmation contract, which is not fully captured by the schema property descriptions alone.

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 a specific verb and resource: 'Deletes a nominal journal batch using its current concurrency timestamp.' This clearly distinguishes the tool from the many sibling create/get/update/list operations for nominal journal batches and other 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 provides clear usage context: a valid routeToken from brc_route_request is required, confirmWrite must be set to true only after explicit user confirmation, and preflight is not confirmation. It does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use this tool, but the workflow guidance is strong enough for correct invocation.

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

All Red by Big Red Cloud 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