Trainzilla Coach MCP

revoke_api_key

Destructive

Revoke an API key; anything using it stops working immediately. (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": {
      "id": "<id>"
    },
    "name": "revoke_api_key"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`id`	Yes
`confirm`	No	Must be true to actually execute. If false/omitted, returns a preview only.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

AddedOct 29, 2026

TDQS

A4.2/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already flag destructiveHint=true, but the description adds meaningful context beyond that: the effect is immediate and breaks anything using the key. The confirm-gating behavior (preview until confirm: true) is also disclosed, which is important for an agent to avoid accidental execution. It doesn't state whether revocation is permanent/irreversible.

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 compact clauses, front-loaded with the action and impact, then the confirm protocol. No wasted words.

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 no output schema, the description covers impact and the preview/execute gating well. Minor gap: no statement about reversibility or what the preview response contains.

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 50%: the confirm parameter is already fully documented in the schema, and the description only echoes that. The id parameter is unannotated in both places, and the description doesn't clarify whether it is the key's identifier or prefix. Marginal added value over 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?

States a specific verb+resource ('Revoke an API key') and immediately scopes the consequence. It is clearly distinguishable from sibling key-management tools like create_api_key, list_api_keys, and from other revoke_* tools such as revoke_gym_kiosk and revoke_plan_share_links.

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?

Gives clear context for invoking it (revoking a credential so dependent clients stop working) and explains the confirm flow needed to actually execute. It stops short of naming alternatives or exclusions, e.g. when to revoke vs. rotate/create a replacement key.

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

All Trainzilla Coach MCP 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.