delete_load_templateDelete a saved load template by its id (starts with lt_). Auth required.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| load_template_id | Yes | Template id to delete (starts with lt_) |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already indicate destructiveHint=true. The description adds useful context: auth requirement and the id format (starts with lt_). No contradictions.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is a single, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. Every part is essential.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
For a simple delete tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description provides all necessary context: action, resource, id format, and auth requirement.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema coverage is 100%, and the schema already describes the parameter well. The description repeats this information without adding new meaning. Baseline 3 is appropriate.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description explicitly states 'Delete a saved load template by its id', using a specific verb and resource. It clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like 'save_load_template' and 'load_templates'.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The description mentions 'Auth required', but does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives or when not to use it. No exclusions or prerequisites are stated.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Each tool has a clearly distinct purpose. Overlapping tools like batch_quote, compare_modes, and per-mode quote tools are clearly differentiated by their scope and use cases. Batch vs single booking are also distinct.
Most tools follow a verb_noun pattern in snake_case (e.g., batch_quote, list_bookings). A few like 'analytics' and 'events' are noun-only but still clear. Overall consistent with minor deviations.
26 tools cover a broad logistics domain including quoting, booking, tracking, documents, and account management. While slightly heavy, each tool serves a specific function and the count is reasonable for the scope.
The tool set appears complete for freight operations: all major modes quoted, single/batch/multi-stop booking, tracking, documents, invoices, history, and account management. No obvious missing CRUD operations.