Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
@cookiemunch/mcp

@cookiemunch/mcp

Official
by Cookie-Munch
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

erase_subject_data

Crypto-erase a data subject's consent records using their consent-receipt stamp for GDPR/CCPA deletion. Destroys the encryption key while preserving the tamper-evident chain.

Instructions

IRREVERSIBLY crypto-erase a data subject's consent records by their consent-receipt stamp (GDPR/CCPA deletion). Destroys the encryption key; the tamper-evident chain stays intact.

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": {
      "cbid": "<cbid>",
      "stamp": "<stamp>"
    },
    "name": "erase_subject_data"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
cbidYes
stampYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A3.9/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Discloses irreversibility, key destruction, and audit chain integrity. No annotation coverage, so description carries burden well.

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?

Two sentences, no waste. Front-loaded with action and critical warning.

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

Completeness4/5

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

Covers purpose, effect, and safety. Could mention permissions or return status, but adequate for a destructive tool without output 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?

Describes 'stamp' as consent-receipt stamp, but 'cbid' is unexplained. With 0% schema coverage, more param detail needed.

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?

Clearly states it irreversibly crypto-erases consent records by stamp, explicitly for GDPR/CCPA deletion. Differentiates from siblings like export_subject_data.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

Implied usage for GDPR/CCPA deletion, but no explicit guidance on when not to use or alternatives.

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