Verified Handles

Remove an old short name

delete_renamed_short

Destructive

Remove an entry’s old short name (list_path_redirects’ renamed), as Remove on Console → Redirects and on the entry’s console card does: / stops leading to the entry and is a 404 at once (it is taken off the site’s cache), or an entry’s once one takes it as its short name. Only an old short name a rename left; never an entry’s current short or the old wiki’s aliases. Audited against the entry with the key and the tool. Dry run by default; the real run needs confirm set to the old short name’s exact key, as the dry run gives it.

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`key`	Yes	The old short name, without its leading “/”, e.g. "old-name" for /old-name.
`confirm`	No	Needed with dry_run: false: this change’s exact target, as the dry run gives it in `confirm`.
`dry_run`	No	true (the default): write nothing — show the change and the exact request it would send. false: make the change.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description
`note`	No	A dry run: what to do next to make the change, in words.
`result`	No	A real run: the route’s own answer, where the tool adds facts of its own beside it.
`confirm`	No	A dry run of a change that needs it: the exact target to send back as `confirm` with dry_run: false.
`dry_run`	No	true: a dry run, which wrote nothing. Absent from a real run.
`replayed`	No	A real run with an idempotency_key already used for this change: the first call’s answer, given back; nothing was written now.
`would_send`	No	A dry run: the exact request the real run would send (`method`, `path`, any `headers` such as an Idempotency-Key, and its `body`, `form` or `query`), or the requests, in order.
`may_edit_live`	No	A dry run of a live edit: whether this key’s account may edit this entry live.
`refused_because`	No	A dry run the real run would be refused for: why, in words.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

AddedOct 27, 2026

TDQS

A4.3/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the destructive annotation, the description discloses immediate behavioral effects: /<key> stops leading to the entry, becomes a 404 at once, and is removed from the site’s cache. It also notes auditing and the dry-run/confirm workflow, adding meaningful operational context.

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

Conciseness3/5

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

The purpose is front-loaded, but the first sentence is dense and contains a confusing clause about an entry taking the old name as its short name. The information is largely useful, but the structure could be clearer and more concise.

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 destructive mutation tool with full schema coverage, annotations, and an output schema, the description is complete. It covers effects, prerequisites, exclusions, auditing, and the dry-run/confirm flow.

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%, so key, confirm, and dry_run are already documented in the schema. The description reinforces their roles but adds little syntax or format detail beyond what the schema already provides.

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?

The description states a specific verb and resource: removing an entry’s old short name. It also distinguishes this from an entry’s current short name and the old wiki’s aliases, so the agent can tell exactly which resource is targeted.

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?

It clearly states when to use it: only for an old short name left by a rename, never for the current short name or old wiki aliases. It also explains the dry-run default and the confirm requirement for real execution, though it does not name sibling alternatives.

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

All Verified Handles 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.