Skip to main content
Glama

clear_client_macro_targets

Destructive

Remove a client's coach-set targets so the app falls back to its automatic estimate. (confirm-gated: previews until confirm: true)

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": {
      "clientId": "<clientId>"
    },
    "name": "clear_client_macro_targets"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
confirmNoMust be true to actually execute. If false/omitted, returns a preview only.
clientIdYesClient's User _id (from list_clients)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Added

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Beyond destructiveHint=true, the description discloses the confirm-gated preview behavior and the downstream effect on the client's macro calculation, which the annotations do not convey. It stops short of saying whether cleared targets are recoverable or what a preview response contains.

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 tight sentences with the action and its consequence front-loaded and the confirm gate as a brief parenthetical; nothing is wasted or buried.

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 two-parameter destructive tool with full schema coverage and no output schema, the description covers the action, its effect, and the confirmation requirement. Only permission/ownership requirements and preview payload details are absent, which is minor.

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%, including a full explanation of the confirm flag, so the description's parenthetical merely restates it. Baseline 3 applies since the schema carries all parameter meaning.

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 names a specific verb and resource ('Remove a client's coach-set targets') and states the resulting state change ('the app falls back to its automatic estimate'), which implicitly but clearly distinguishes it from set_client_macro_targets and get_client_macro_targets.

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?

The fallback-to-automatic-estimate phrasing implies the use case (reverting coach overrides), but no sibling is named and there are no explicit when-not conditions or prerequisites, leaving the agent to infer that set_client_macro_targets is the counterpart.

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.