Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
ClockNext MCP Server

ClockNext MCP Server

Official
by Clocknext-Inc
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

ClockNext: archive credit

clocknext_archive_credit
DestructiveIdempotent

Deactivate a credit type to retire it from your catalogue without deleting it. Existing plans and usage remain active; only new assignments are blocked. Reversible.

Instructions

Deactivate a credit TYPE in your catalogue (sets isActive→false) — ClockNext's soft archive, NOT a delete. The credit and its history are kept; recorded usage and any plan already granting it keep working (update those plans with clocknext_update_plan to stop offering it). It simply can't be added to new plans and drops out of active lists. Reversible: reactivate via clocknext_update_credit with isActive:true (a full rewrite) — there is no separate un-archive tool. Use ONLY to retire a credit you no longer sell. This does NOT delete anything and is unrelated to archiving a customer, ending a purchase, or clearing a balance.

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": "clocknext_archive_credit"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYesThe credit id to deactivate (soft-archive — reversible, not a delete).

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.6.0

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

The description goes beyond annotations by detailing the soft-archive behavior: keeps credit/history, existing plans keep working, new plans cannot add it, it drops from active lists, and is reversible. Even though destructiveHint=true exists, the description clarifies the operation is non-destructive and reversible, providing context annotations alone could not convey.

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 fairly long but every sentence earns its place: action, effects, reversibility, usage scope, and explicit non-goals. It is front-loaded with the core action. Slight verbosity could be trimmed, but the structure is logical and dense with useful information.

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 single-parameter tool with no output schema, the description fully covers behavior, side effects, reversibility, and exclusions. It also cross-references related tools (update_plan, update_credit) for follow-up actions, making the tool context complete enough for an agent to use 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 already states the parameter id is 'The credit id to deactivate (soft-archive — reversible, not a delete).' The description repeats this but adds no new literal meaning beyond emphasizing reversibility and non-deletion. With 100% schema coverage, the prose adds minimal additional parameter-level value.

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?

The description immediately identifies the tool as deactivating a credit TYPE (sets isActive→false), clearly distinguishing it from a delete and from other archive tools (e.g., archive_plan, archive_customer). It names the exact verb and resource, and explicitly states what it does not do, leaving no ambiguity.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

Provides explicit use context: 'Use ONLY to retire a credit you no longer sell.' It also lists exclusions and alternatives: update_plan to stop offering on plans, update_credit to reactivate, and clarifies it is unrelated to archiving customers/ending purchases/clearing balances. This is exemplary guidance for when and when not to use.

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