Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Player Two

by lol.playertwo
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Delete a posted update

delete_update
DestructiveIdempotent

Take one of the player's developer posts (kind devlog) off its game's page for good, by its id from list_updates: gone from the page, the feeds, the studio and the API; the notices it sent are taken out of players' lists (an email already sent stays sent); its pictures and video leave the store a day later unless another post shows them; unpinned if it was pinned. It can't be undone: only when the player asked for it. Player Two's own posts can't be deleted.

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": {
      "slug": "<slug>",
      "id": "<id>"
    },
    "name": "delete_update"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYesThe post's id, from list_updates.
slugYesThe game's address on Player Two (playertwo.lol/game/<slug>).

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare destructive=true and idempotent=true, but the description goes well beyond them, enumerating cascade effects: removal from page, feeds, studio and API; notice removal; media retention for a day unless shared; unpinning; and the exception that already-sent email persists. The remaining gap is that it never says what the call returns or whether a confirmation token is required.

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 destructive action and follows with consequences, so an agent can stop reading after the first clause. However, the long semicolon-chained sentence is dense and some clauses (studio, feeds, API) overlap in meaning, which costs a point on structure.

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 an irreversible mutation with no output schema, the description covers consequences, irreversibility, ownership restriction and the id source, which is close to complete. It only omits the response shape and any permission/auth requirement.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema itself documents both parameters, making 3 the baseline. The description nonetheless adds real meaning by tying 'id' to list_updates as its source and implicitly constraining deletion to the author's own posts, which is more than the schema states.

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 precise verb and resource ('Take one of the player's developer posts (kind devlog) off its game's page for good, by its id'), and scopes it to devlog kind posts, which cleanly separates it from edit_update, pin_update and hide_comment in the sibling list.

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 a clear selection rule for the id ('from list_updates') and a gating condition ('only when the player asked for it'), which effectively tells the agent to require explicit user consent. It does not name the non-destructive alternatives (edit_update, unpinning) explicitly, so it falls short of full when/when-not/alternative guidance.

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

All Player Two toolsInspect
Try in Browser
Claude Code, inside the Godot 4 editorFlockbay puts an AI agent in the real Godot 4 editor: it writes GDScript, runs your game and fixes what breaks. Free, or bring your own Claude Code or Codex.flockbay.comAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources