Skip to main content
Glama

Rebbel

by io.rebbel
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Archive brand

archive_brand
DestructiveIdempotent

Hides a brand from list_brands — for a brand the user is done with, or an accidental duplicate. Doesn't delete anything underneath it (campaigns, connections, billing history all stay intact). Not reversible from here — the user restores it from the Rebbel dashboard. An archived brand publishes, schedules and promotes nothing; pass cancelScheduled: true to also cancel its scheduled posts now (they stay approved, without a time).

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
brandIdYesThe brand's id, from list_brands. Only archive one the user actually wants gone from their list — this hides it (campaigns, connections, and billing history are all kept intact), it isn't a hard delete, but there's no unarchive tool here — the user restores it from the dashboard if they change their mind.
cancelScheduledNoPass true to also cancel every post of this brand that is scheduled and not yet published, on every channel — each goes back to approved with no time, and nothing is re-scheduled if the brand is restored later. Published posts are never touched. Either way, an archived brand publishes nothing: a scheduled post that comes due while it is archived is cancelled instead of published.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / cancelScheduled
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Pass true to also cancel every post of this brand that is scheduled and not yet published, on every channel — each goes back to approved with no time, and nothing is re-scheduled if the brand is restored later. Published posts are never touched. Either way, an archived brand publishes nothing: a scheduled post that comes due while it is archived is cancelled instead of published.",
+  "type": "boolean"
+}
  2. First observed

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Goes well beyond the annotations (destructiveHint=true, idempotentHint=true): it discloses that nothing underneath is deleted (campaigns, connections, billing history kept), that it is not reversible via any tool here, and that an archived brand publishes/schedules/promotes nothing, plus exactly what cancelScheduled does and that published posts are never touched. This is rich, invocation-relevant behavioral detail.

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?

Front-loads the core action and hides/deletion distinction in the first two sentences, then details the cancelScheduled flag. Slightly redundant ('Doesn't delete anything underneath it' and 'campaigns... stay intact' restate the same point), but every sentence is otherwise load-bearing.

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

Completeness5/5

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

For a two-parameter mutation tool with full schema coverage and annotations covering safety, the description supplies everything an agent needs: what is affected, what is preserved, reversibility, and the optional side effect of cancelScheduled. No output schema exists, and the description explains resulting states adequately.

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

Parameters4/5

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

Schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3; the description adds a concise restatement of the cancelScheduled effect ('cancel its scheduled posts now, they stay approved without a time') and the intent gating for brandId ('only archive one the user actually wants gone'). That reinforcement of the non-obvious flag semantics lifts it above baseline.

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 ('archive_brand' hides a brand from list_brands) and explicitly distinguishes scope from siblings by naming list_brands and noting there is no unarchive counterpart here. An agent can immediately tell this apart from rename_brand or archive_campaign.

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 when-to-use context ('a brand the user is done with, or an accidental duplicate') and a prerequisite/limitation ('not reversible from here — the user restores it from the Rebbel dashboard'). It does not explicitly name a sibling alternative such as archive_campaign for comparison, so it stops short of a full 5.

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

All Rebbel 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