Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
addy-mcp

addy-mcp

by Former-Stranger
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Remote

delete_username

Destructive

Deletes a username by UUID, causing all associated aliases to stop working.

Instructions

Delete a username. Its aliases stop working.

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": {
      "username_id": "<username_id>"
    },
    "name": "delete_username"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
username_idYesThe id (UUID) of the item

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.2

TDQS

B3.4/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, so the description is not carrying the safety burden. It does add one piece of real behavioral context — aliases stop working — but omits whether those aliases are deleted or orphaned, whether the action is reversible, and whether it is immediate. Useful but partial beyond the annotations.

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 short sentences, front-loaded with the action and followed immediately by the most important side effect. Every word earns its place with no filler.

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?

For a single-parameter destructive tool with full schema coverage and no output schema, the description covers the action and its main consequence. Given the destructive annotation, a note on irreversibility or alias handling would close the remaining gap, but nothing essential for invoking it correctly 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?

Only one parameter, and the schema already documents it at 100% coverage (UUID of the item). The description adds no format, lookup, or validation detail beyond that, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ("Delete a username") and adds the consequence that its aliases stop working, which hints at scope beyond a single object. It does not explicitly distinguish itself from the closely related delete_alias sibling, so it stops short of a 5.

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 when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance is given; the agent is not told how this differs from delete_alias or from an option-based deactivation, nor what prerequisites (ownership, admin rights) apply. Usage is only implied by the tool name.

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