Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
mcp-server-smallinvoice

mcp-server-smallinvoice

by AIWerk
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

delete_contact_accounts

Destructive

Delete specified accounts from a contact by providing the contact ID and comma-separated account IDs.

Instructions

Deletes specified accounts

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": {
      "contact_id": "<contact_id>",
      "accounts_ids": "<accounts_ids>"
    },
    "name": "delete_contact_accounts"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
contact_idYescontact ID
accounts_idsYesaccounts IDs (comma separated)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

C2.9/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

Annotations already indicate destructiveHint=true, and the description repeats this without adding new behavioral insights (e.g., irreversibility, required permissions, side effects). The description adds no value beyond annotations.

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 description is a single, succinct sentence. It is appropriately front-loaded but may be too brief for full clarity. No wasted words.

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

Completeness3/5

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

For a simple delete tool with two parameters and no output schema, the description is minimally adequate. It lacks details on error cases (e.g., if contact_id does not exist) but is not critically incomplete.

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 coverage is 100%, and the description does not elaborate on parameters beyond the schema's own descriptions. Baseline 3 applies because the schema carries the full burden.

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 clearly states the action (delete) and resource (accounts), and the name specifies it's for contact accounts. However, it could be more explicit about the type of accounts (e.g., 'contact accounts') and its scope relative to siblings like delete_bank_accounts.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There are many sibling delete tools (e.g., delete_bank_accounts, delete_contacts), but the description provides no context for selection or prerequisites.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools