Renor

Undo one vault import batch

undo_import

DestructiveIdempotent

Undo this batch's claim on imported notes. A created note stays live while a later batch still asserts the same bytes; undoing the last such batch retires it. Preserves pre-existing files, conflicts and later edits; reports preserved paths and the re-assertion reason. Uses existing retirement journal and trash. Batch receipts persist across restarts and are tenant-local.

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`batchId`	Yes

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`ok`	Yes
`batchId`	Yes
`retired`	No
`preserved`	No
`alreadyUndone`	No
`preservedReasons`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedOct 29, 2026

changedOutput schema / (root)

Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "$schema": "http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#",
+  "additionalProperties": {},
+  "properties": {
+    "alreadyUndone": {
+      "type": "boolean"
+    },
+    "batchId": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "ok": {
+      "type": "boolean"
+    },
+    "preserved": {
+      "items": {
+        "type": "string"
+      },
+      "type": "array"
+    },
+    "preservedReasons": {
+      "additionalProperties": {
+        "type": "string"
+      },
+      "propertyNames": {
+        "type": "string"
+      },
+      "type": "object"
+    },
+    "retired": {
+      "type": "number"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "ok",
+    "batchId"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}

First observedOct 17, 2026

TDQS

B3.4/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

The description adds substantial behavioral detail beyond the annotations: it explains that notes may stay live if a later batch asserts the same bytes, that only the last such batch retires them, what is preserved, what is reported, and that retirement uses the existing journal and trash. This is rich context for a destructive operation.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is front-loaded and relatively compact for a complex operation, with each sentence carrying relevant behavioral information. It is somewhat dense and jargon-heavy, but not wasteful.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

The description covers side effects, preservation behavior, and reporting, and an output schema exists so return values need not be explained. However, it leaves a meaningful gap around the required batchId and does not connect the tool to its import-related siblings.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters2/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The single required parameter, batchId, has no schema description and the description does not explain how to obtain or interpret it. The phrase 'this batch's' implies a batch identifier, but the description does not compensate for the zero schema-description coverage.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description states a specific verb and resource: undo a batch's claim on imported notes. It is clear about the operation, but it does not explicitly distinguish itself from sibling tools such as apply_import or preview_import.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

The description explains what the operation does but gives no explicit guidance on when to use it versus alternatives. There is no mention of preconditions, alternatives, or when not to undo an import batch.

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

All Renor 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.