Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

PowPow

by io.github.durenzidu
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Delete an AI-published Post

delete_post
Destructive

撤回通过 AI 发布的帖子，仅限发布后 24 小时内。站内自己发的帖子不在这里删——请到站内帖子页删除。删除不可撤销，帖子的评论和点赞会一起消失。

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": {
      "post_id": "<post_id>"
    },
    "name": "delete_post"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
post_idYes要撤回的帖子 id（publish_post 返回的 post_id）

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, so the destructive nature is known; the description still earns credit by adding that the deletion is irreversible and that the post's comments and likes are removed with it, which annotations cannot express. It stops short of stating authorization requirements (must be the caller's own AI-published post) or what happens past 24 hours.

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?

Three compact clauses ordered by importance: what is deleted, what it is not for, then the irreversible side effects. No filler or repeated information.

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 single-parameter destructive tool with no output schema and annotations covering the safety profile, the description supplies the missing pieces: eligibility window, exclusions, and cascading effects. Only ownership/authorization behavior is left unstated.

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 100% and the single post_id parameter is already documented as the id returned by publish_post. The description adds no format, ownership, or validity detail beyond what the schema provides, so baseline 3 applies.

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?

Names a specific verb+resource ('撤回通过 AI 发布的帖子') and immediately scopes it to AI-published posts within 24 hours, which separates it from the sibling publish_post flow and from in-site post deletion. An agent can tell exactly what this tool removes without opening the schema.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Explicitly states the when-not case ('站内自己发的帖子不在这里删——请到站内帖子页删除') and names the alternative destination, plus a hard 24-hour eligibility window. Routing guidance and preconditions are both present.

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

All PowPow 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