Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Mailercloud

by io.github.mailercloud-com
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Delete Transactional Webhook (preview, then confirm)

delete_transactional_webhook
DestructiveIdempotent

Delete a transactional (Email API) webhook. Its URL stops receiving events and this cannot be undone; needs webhook_id. Shows a preview first and deletes only with 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": {
      "webhook_id": "<webhook_id>"
    },
    "name": "delete_transactional_webhook"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
confirmNoMust be true to make the change. Leave it out first to get a preview, show it to the user, and ask them to confirm
dry_runNoShow what would be deleted without deleting
webhook_idYesTransactional webhook ID

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Added

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, readOnlyHint=false and idempotentHint=true, so the safety profile is known; the description adds real value by explaining the consequence (URL stops receiving events) and irreversibility, plus the two-step preview/confirm workflow the annotations don't convey. It is consistent with idempotentHint=true ('cannot be undone' is about reversibility, not repeat-call safety). It stops short of saying what the preview actually shows.

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 short sentences, front-loaded with the action and the consequence, then the safety workflow. No filler or redundant restatement of the title.

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 destructive 3-parameter delete with no output schema, it covers irreversibility, the affected behavior, the required ID and the confirm gate. The only material gap is not describing what the preview response contains, which matters for the 'show it to the user' step.

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%, so the schema already documents confirm, dry_run and webhook_id, including the preview-then-confirm workflow. The description restates confirm:true and the need for webhook_id but adds no format or edge-case detail, and never mentions dry_run, 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?

States a specific verb (Delete) and a specific resource (transactional/Email API webhook), and the parenthetical disambiguates it from the sibling delete_webhook. An agent can distinguish this from delete_webhook and delete_domain/delete_list 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 Guidelines4/5

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

Gives clear operating context: preview first, delete only with confirm: true. It does not explicitly say 'use delete_webhook for non-transactional webhooks', but the resource qualifier does most of that routing work.

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

All Mailercloud 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