Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
VoiceAI-MCP-VAVicky

VoiceAI-MCP-VAVicky

Official
by AiAgency-Now
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Remote

delete_assistant

Remove an assistant from the VoiceAI platform to manage your AI chat integrations and maintain system organization.

Instructions

Delete an assistant

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": {
      "assistant_id": "<assistant_id>"
    },
    "name": "delete_assistant"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
assistant_idYesAssistant ID

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

C2.9/5.0
Behavior2/5

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. While 'Delete' implies a destructive operation, it doesn't specify whether deletion is permanent/reversible, what permissions are required, whether associated resources are also deleted, or what happens on success/failure. This is inadequate for a destructive tool with zero annotation coverage.

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 words, front-loading the core action. There's zero wasted language, though this conciseness comes at the cost of completeness.

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 operation with no annotations and no output schema, the description is insufficient. It should address permanence, side effects, permissions, or response format. The minimal description doesn't provide enough context for safe and effective use.

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?

The schema has 100% description coverage with one parameter (assistant_id) clearly documented in the schema. The description doesn't add any parameter information beyond what's already in the schema, but with 0 parameters needing additional explanation, the baseline is 4.

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

Purpose3/5

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

The description 'Delete an assistant' clearly states the verb (delete) and resource (assistant), but it's vague about scope and doesn't distinguish from sibling tools like delete_assistant_file. It's a basic statement of purpose without specificity about what constitutes an 'assistant' in this context.

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 is provided about when to use this tool versus alternatives like update_assistant or get_assistant. There's no mention of prerequisites, consequences, or typical scenarios where deletion is appropriate versus other operations.

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