flayr

Delete a posting queue

delete_queue

DestructiveIdempotent

[DESTRUCTIVE] DESTRUCTIVE: deletes the queue (its drafts stay in the library). With posts booked at the platform it is refused (409) unless unschedule: true, which first deletes those platform posts. Needs the publish scope (or admin) on the Agency plan or higher. Ask the user before calling. (Wraps DELETE /api/v2/queues/{id}.)

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": {
      "id": "<id>"
    },
    "name": "delete_queue"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`id`	Yes
`brandId`	No	Account-wide keys: "personal" or an id from GET /api/v2/brands (omitted → the brand last active in the dashboard). A brand-bound key always uses its own brand.
`unschedule`	No	true: delete every booked post at the platform first (the dashboard's "Unschedule"), then delete. Without it a booked post is a 409 — nothing is ever left booked at the platform without its queue item.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedOct 21, 2026

TDQS

A4.6/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already mark it destructive and idempotent, but the description adds the details that matter: drafts survive, booked posts cause a 409 unless unschedule is set, platform posts are deleted first, and a publish scope plus Agency plan is required. That is real context beyond structured fields.

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?

Dense but front-loaded, with the destructive warning first and the refusal path next. Minor waste from the doubled "[DESTRUCTIVE] DESTRUCTIVE:" prefix and the closing endpoint note.

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, irreversible tool with no output schema, the description covers the key hazards: what is destroyed, what is preserved, the 409 refusal path, the required scope and plan, and the user-confirmation expectation. Nothing critical is missing.

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 67% and the description reinforces the unschedule semantics without contradicting them; brandId and unschedule are already well documented in the schema. The bare id parameter is left undocumented, but its meaning is unambiguous from the endpoint wrapper.

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 ("deletes the queue") plus a clarifying consequence ("its drafts stay in the library"), which distinguishes it from sibling remove_queue_item and delete_content. Also cites the underlying DELETE /api/v2/queues/{id} endpoint.

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 operational guidance: ask the user first, and use unschedule:true when platform posts are booked or the call returns 409. It names no sibling alternatives explicitly, so it falls just short of a 5.

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

All flayr 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.

Resources

Need Help?