Skip to main content
Glama
Pavelsiba

yandex-direct-mcp-plus

by Pavelsiba
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

Удалить списки ретаргетинга

delete_retargeting_lists
Destructive

Delete retargeting and audience lists by ID in Yandex.Direct; deletion is irreversible. Partial failures return an error string while other lists are removed.

Instructions

Удалить условия ретаргетинга и подбора аудитории по ID; удаление необратимо. Отказ по отдельному условию приходит строкой ❌ в ответе, остальные при этом удалены.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
dry_runNotrue — ничего не менять: проверить параметры и вернуть тела запросов, которые ушли бы в Директ. Чтение при этом выполняется.
retargeting_list_idsYesУсловия, которые нужно удалить; ID берутся из list_retargeting_lists

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv1.7.0
    • addedInput schema / properties / dry_run
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "true — ничего не менять: проверить параметры и вернуть тела запросов, которые ушли бы в Директ. Чтение при этом выполняется.",
+  "type": "boolean"
+}
  2. First observedv1.6.1

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, so credibility goes to what's added beyond them: irreversibility and a non-obvious partial-failure model where an individual failure returns a ❌ string while the remaining IDs are still deleted. This response-shape disclosure is valuable, especially with no output schema.

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 tight clauses, front-loaded with the action and scope, followed by the two highest-value caveats (irreversibility, partial failure). 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 destructive batch delete with no output schema, the description adequately covers the irreversible nature and the surprising error behavior. It stops short of noting the dry_run alternative or bounds (maxItems 1000), but those live in the schema.

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 100%, so the schema already documents both dry_run and retargeting_list_ids, including that IDs come from list_retargeting_lists. The description confirms the ID-based targeting but adds no syntax or bounds beyond the schema, so the baseline 3 applies.

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+resource ('Удалить условия ретаргетинга и подбора аудитории по ID') that an agent can immediately distinguish from the list_/add_/update_retargeting_lists siblings. Scope (by ID) is explicit.

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 delete action against retargeting/audience conditions is self-evident, and the source of IDs is implied via the schema. However, the description never states when to reach for this tool vs. update_retargeting_lists or list_retargeting_lists, nor any prerequisites, so it only implies usage.

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