clicknglide-mcp

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

delete_all_field_signups

Deletes all signups for a field on a specified date, with email notifications to members by default. Without confirm=true, only shows a preview.

Instructions

Supprime TOUTES les inscriptions d'un champ pour une journée. send_emails (vrai par défaut) prévient chaque membre par email. Sans confirm=true : aperçu seulement.

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": {
      "date": "<date>",
      "field_id": "<field_id>"
    },
    "name": "delete_all_field_signups"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`date`	Yes
`confirm`	No
`field_id`	Yes
`send_emails`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Oct 21, 2026

TDQS

A3.9/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden and does well on critical points: it is destructive and bulk, it requires confirm=true for actual deletion, and send_emails=true notifies every member by email. It still omits permissions, reversibility, and rate-limit behavior.

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?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with the destructive scope. Every sentence carries concrete information about deletion, email side effects, and preview safety.

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

Completeness3/5

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

For a destructive bulk tool with no annotations, no output schema, and 0% schema coverage, the description covers the key invocation safety checks but omits auth requirements, reversibility, and what the preview return looks like.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It explains confirm and send_emails well, including defaults and the preview behavior, but adds no format or meaning for date and field_id beyond the implied day/field scope.

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 and resource with clear scope: deletes ALL signups for one field on one day. The 'TOUTES' and day/field scoping distinguishes it from the sibling delete_signup tool, which appears to target a single signup.

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?

The description implies usage through the preview gate ('Sans confirm=true : aperçu seulement') and bulk scope, but it names no alternatives and gives no explicit when-to-use vs delete_signup or delete_signup_by_user guidance.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.