Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
@yawlabs/lemonsqueezy-mcp

@yawlabs/lemonsqueezy-mcp

by YawLabs
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

ls_delete_webhook

DestructiveIdempotent

Delete a webhook permanently using its ID. This irreversible action removes the webhook from your LemonSqueezy account.

Instructions

Permanently delete a webhook. This is irreversible.

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": {
      "webhookId": "<webhookId>"
    },
    "name": "ls_delete_webhook"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
webhookIdYesThe webhook ID to delete

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.10.10

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already indicate destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=true. The description adds 'This is irreversible', reinforcing the destructive nature, but does not disclose potential side effects or prerequisites, such as whether the webhook must be inactive.

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?

The description is extremely concise with two sentences, directly stating the action and irreversibility. Every word is purposeful, and the critical information is front-loaded.

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 simple delete operation with one required parameter, the description is complete. It conveys the action, permanent nature, and no output schema is needed. The simplicity of the tool does not demand more context.

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?

The input schema provides 100% coverage with a clear description for the only parameter 'webhookId'. The tool's description adds no additional parameter information beyond what the schema already provides, resulting in a baseline score of 3.

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?

The description clearly states the verb 'delete' and the resource 'webhook', and emphasizes irreversibility. It effectively distinguishes from sibling tools like ls_create_webhook, ls_update_webhook, and ls_get_webhook by specifying a permanent deletion action.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. While the context of deleting is implied, the description does not provide conditions or contrast with other tools like ls_update_webhook for deactivating a webhook.

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