Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

ThreadPage

by page.thread
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Move a note to Trash

trash_note
DestructiveIdempotent

Move a Note to Trash; its content and history are kept and restore_note brings it back (trash_thread retires a whole Thread). Refused while the Note has an open request (request_open). Can edit and organize trashes any Note; Can add notes only the Notes it added, else edit_not_allowed. expected_revision is not compared. Answers a receipt whose url opens Trash.

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": {
      "operation_id": "<operation_id>",
      "note_id": "<note_id>",
      "expected_revision": "<expected_revision>"
    },
    "name": "trash_note"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
note_idYesA Note's id, from get_thread, search or get_note.
operation_idYesA new UUID for each write. After a lost answer, send the identical call with the same one, or check get_operation before writing again.
expected_revisionYesIts revision from list_threads, get_thread, list_folders or get_note (not a content_revision); not compared.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / expected_revision / description
      Previous value: -"The revision you last read for it."New value: +"Its revision from list_threads, get_thread, list_folders or get_note (not a content_revision); not compared."
  2. First observed

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=true, but the description adds material context they do not carry: the content and history are retained and recoverable via restore_note, the operation can be refused with a specific error code, permission behavior varies by role, expected_revision is not compared, and the response is a receipt whose url opens Trash. That is exactly the extra behavioral layer annotations cannot express.

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?

The irreversible-outcome caveat and the sibling routing are front-loaded, and each clause carries real information. It is dense to the point of being run-on in the permission sentence, but nothing is filler and nothing could be dropped without losing a caller-relevant fact.

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 3-parameter destructive write with no output schema, the definition covers reversibility, refusal conditions, permissions, revision handling and the shape of the answer (a receipt with a Trash url). Nothing an agent needs in order to call this safely is missing.

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%: note_id, operation_id and expected_revision each carry their own sourcing and idempotency notes. The description's only parameter remark, "expected_revision is not compared," restates what the schema already says, so it adds no meaning beyond the structured field. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 and resource ("Move a Note to Trash") and immediately distinguishes it from the two nearest siblings: restore_note brings it back, while trash_thread retires a whole Thread. An agent can pick this tool over those two 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?

Gives explicit when-not conditions with the error code: refused while the Note has an open request (request_open). It also states the caller-specific permission rules ("Can edit and organize trashes any Note; Can add notes only the Notes it added, else edit_not_allowed"), so the agent knows both the blocking precondition and the authorization model before calling.

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

All ThreadPage 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