R3

Remove a preview link

r3_preview_remove

DestructiveIdempotent

Remove the preview link of an R3 project: every preview link to it stops working at once (teammates' too). Only when the user asked for it, or when the preview link is what blocks an r3_project_delete the user asked for: a preview link is temporary, so it may then be removed without a separate request, and the user is told it was removed. A live project stays live; a project that was only previewed is no longer published. Deletes nothing: r3_preview_create makes a new link. A project with no open preview link is refused and left as it is. Needs the publish:preview right.

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`projectId`	Yes	The project id (r3_project_list).

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description
`live`	Yes
`answer`	Yes	This answer in words: what was done, what R3 measured, decided or refused, and what to do next. The same text as the result's text block. Read it: the fields beside it are the data, this is the guidance.
`projectId`	Yes
`environment`	Yes
`previewRemoved`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed2 schema fields changedOct 15, 2026

addedOutput schema / properties / answer

Added value: +{
+  "description": "This answer in words: what was done, what R3 measured, decided or refused, and what to do next. The same text as the result's text block. Read it: the fields beside it are the data, this is the guidance.",
+  "type": "string"
+}

changedOutput schema / required

Previous value: -[
-  "projectId",
-  "previewRemoved",
-  "live",
-  "environment"
-]New value: +[
+  "projectId",
+  "previewRemoved",
+  "live",
+  "environment",
+  "answer"
+]

First observedOct 15, 2026

TDQS

A4.4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Goes well beyond the annotations: discloses the blast radius ('every preview link to it stops working at once (teammates' too)'), the post-state distinction (live project stays live vs. preview-only project becomes unpublished), the no-open-link refusal, and the needed 'publish:preview' right. The 'Deletes nothing' line usefully scopes what destructiveHint=true actually means (link removal, not data loss). Minor deduction only because it's already very close to complete.

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-loaded with the core action and side effect, and every sentence carries real information (scope, exceptions, refusal, auth). Slightly weakened by colon-heavy run-on sentences that stack multiple clauses, but nothing is wasted.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need no explanation, and the description covers everything else an agent needs: side effects on teammates, live-vs-preview post-state, the refusal case, the permission requirement, and the related sibling. Nothing material is missing for a one-parameter tool.

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% with a single required projectId already documented as 'The project id (r3_project_list)'. The description adds no format or syntax detail beyond the schema, so the 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+resource ('Remove the preview link of an R3 project') and immediately distinguishes itself from siblings by noting it 'Deletes nothing: r3_preview_create makes a new link.' An agent can tell this apart from r3_preview_create and r3_project_delete without opening any schema.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

Explicitly states when to use it ('Only when the user asked for it') and the one narrow exception (when the preview link 'blocks an r3_project_delete the user asked for'), including why no separate request is needed. This is exactly the when/when-not/alternative guidance the dimension asks for.

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

All R3 tools Inspect

Try in Browser

Shareable, User-Owned Context BackendPeople, applications, and agents read, write, and coordinate together in one context lake. Reach it over MCP, a CLI, a Python SDK, or REST.fulcradynamics.comAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources

Need Help?