Skip to main content
Glama

deleteValueGroup

Remove specified value groups in the Whistle MCP Server to manage proxy rules effectively and optimize network request handling.

Instructions

删除值分组

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
groupNameYes分组名称

Implementation Reference

  • src/index.ts:275-285 (registration)
    Registration of the 'deleteValueGroup' tool using server.addTool, including name, description, input schema, and thin handler that delegates to WhistleClient.
    server.addTool({
      name: "deleteValueGroup",
      description: "删除值分组",
      parameters: z.object({
        groupName: z.string().describe("分组名称"),
      }),
      execute: async (args) => {
        const result = await whistleClient.deleteValueGroup(args.groupName);
        return formatResponse(result);
      },
    });
  • The tool's execute handler: extracts groupName arg, calls WhistleClient.deleteValueGroup, and returns formatted response.
    execute: async (args) => {
      const result = await whistleClient.deleteValueGroup(args.groupName);
      return formatResponse(result);
    },
  • Zod input schema requiring a 'groupName' string parameter.
    parameters: z.object({
      groupName: z.string().describe("分组名称"),
    }),
  • Core implementation in WhistleClient: sends POST request to Whistle's /cgi-bin/values/remove endpoint with the group name prefixed by carriage return (\r{name}) to identify it as a group.
    async deleteValueGroup(name: string): Promise<any> {
      const formData = new URLSearchParams();
      formData.append("clientId", `${Date.now()}-1`);
      formData.append("list[]", `\r${name}`); // Adding carriage return to denote a group
      const response = await axios.post(
        `${this.baseUrl}/cgi-bin/values/remove`,
        formData,
        {
          headers: {
            "Content-Type": "application/x-www-form-urlencoded",
          },
        }
      );
      return response.data;
    }
Behavior1/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure but provides none. It doesn't indicate whether this is a destructive operation (though 'delete' implies it), what permissions are required, whether the deletion is permanent or reversible, what happens to associated values or rules, or what the response looks like. This is inadequate for a mutation tool.

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

Conciseness5/5

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

The description is extremely concise at just three Chinese characters, with zero wasted words. While this conciseness comes at the expense of completeness, the description itself is efficiently structured as a single, clear phrase.

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

Completeness1/5

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

For a destructive deletion tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is completely inadequate. It provides minimal context about what the tool does and offers no information about behavior, consequences, alternatives, or expected outcomes. This leaves critical gaps for an agent trying to understand and use this tool safely.

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?

The schema description coverage is 100%, with the single parameter 'groupName' clearly documented in the schema as '分组名称' (group name). The description adds no additional parameter information beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate given the schema handles the parameter documentation adequately.

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

Purpose2/5

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

The description '删除值分组' (Delete value group) is a tautology that essentially restates the tool name 'deleteValueGroup' in Chinese. While it correctly identifies the verb ('delete') and resource ('value group'), it provides no additional specificity about what this operation entails or how it differs from similar tools like 'deleteGroup' or 'deleteValue'.

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

Usage Guidelines1/5

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

The description offers no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. With multiple deletion-related sibling tools (deleteGroup, deleteRule, deleteValue, removeValueFromGroup), there's no indication of what distinguishes deleting a 'value group' from deleting other entities or when this specific deletion operation is appropriate.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Related Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/7gugu/whistle-mcp'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server