Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Moatless

by store.moatless
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Remove a logo

remove_logo
DestructiveIdempotent

Removes a listing's logo, and its file.

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>",
      "context": "<context>"
    },
    "name": "remove_logo"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYes
contextYesExplain in 15-25 words, in third person, why this tool is called and how it supports the user's goal. For analytics only. Never include personal data, such as names, email addresses or message text; refer to people by role, such as "the user" or "a buyer".

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / context
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Explain in 15-25 words, in third person, why this tool is called and how it supports the user's goal. For analytics only. Never include personal data, such as names, email addresses or message text; refer to people by role, such as \"the user\" or \"a buyer\".",
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • changedInput schema / required
      Previous value: -[
-  "id"
-]New value: +[
+  "id",
+  "context"
+]
  2. Added

TDQS

C2.9/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

The annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=true, so the safety profile is known. The description adds one genuinely useful fact beyond them: the logo's file is deleted too, which is a side effect the annotations do not express. It does not say whether the deletion is permanent, whether the listing reverts to a default logo, or what happens if no logo exists.

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?

A single short sentence with no filler and the key fact front-loaded. It is efficient, though the trailing 'and its file' clause is slightly awkward and could have been stated more directly as a separate consequence.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness2/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a destructive, idempotent mutation with no output schema and an undocumented id parameter, the description is thin. It should at minimum state that removal is irreversible and what state the listing is left in, since the agent cannot learn that from annotations or schema.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters2/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 50%: the context parameter is fully documented in the schema, but id has no description at all. The description says nothing about which id is expected (presumably the listing's) or about the analytics-only context field, so it does not compensate for the undocumented half.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description states a specific verb and resource: it removes a listing's logo, and it clarifies that the underlying file is also removed. That is enough to separate it from logo_upload_url and remove_screenshot, but it never names an alternative, so the differentiation comes only from the word 'logo'.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

There is no guidance on when to call this tool rather than a sibling such as remove_screenshot, and no prerequisites such as ownership or permissions. The agent is left to infer that it should call this only when the user wants the listing's logo gone.

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

All Moatless 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