Skip to main content
Glama
Fistacho

ha-nexus-agent

by Fistacho
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

Remove a runtime entity group

automations_remove_group
DestructiveIdempotent

Remove a runtime group created with automations_set_group. Requires confirm=True; otherwise returns a safety prompt. YAML-defined groups persist.

Instructions

Remove a group created with automations_set_group.

Without confirm=True returns a safety prompt; with confirm=True calls the group.remove service with object_id. Groups defined in groups.yaml come back on the next restart or YAML reload — this only removes the runtime entity.

Returns: dict {"status": "removed", "group_id": "group.<id>"}. Errors: returns {"error": "confirmation_required", "message": ..., "action": ...} when confirm is not True. Limits: requires confirm=True; has no effect on a group defined in groups.yaml beyond the next reload/restart.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
confirmNoMust be True to actually remove the group. False (default) returns a safety prompt instead of removing anything.
group_idYesBare group id or 'group.<id>' to remove.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changedv0.25.1
    • addedInput schema / properties / confirm / description
      Added value: +"Must be True to actually remove the group. False (default) returns a safety prompt instead of removing anything."
    • changedInput schema / properties / group_id / description
      Previous value: -"Bare group id or 'group.<id>'."New value: +"Bare group id or 'group.<id>' to remove."
  2. Addedv0.18.1

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already flag destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=true, and the description adds genuinely new behavioral detail: the confirmation gate, the exact return payload, the error shape for confirmation_required, and the reload/restart caveat for groups.yaml groups. This is exactly the extra context annotations cannot carry.

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?

Front-loads the action and its create-sibling, then separates Returns/Errors/Limits into scannable blocks. No filler sentences; every line conveys operative behavior.

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 destructive mutation tool with an output schema, the description supplies the confirmation workflow, error contract, and persistence caveat that an agent needs to invoke it safely. Nothing material is missing.

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%, so both confirm and group_id are already documented, establishing the baseline of 3. The description's mention of calling the group.remove service with object_id does not match the schema's group_id name, adding mild confusion rather than meaning.

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?

States a specific verb (remove) and resource (runtime entity group), and anchors it to the sibling that created it (automations_set_group), letting an agent place it precisely among automations_list_groups/set_group.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

Clearly explains the two-mode usage (without confirm=True it returns a safety prompt; with confirm=True it actually removes) and the important caveat that YAML-defined groups reappear on reload. It does not explicitly say when to prefer this over a YAML edit, but the context is unambiguous.

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