Homespun

Manage Trash

trash

Destructive

List, restore, or permanently purge soft-deleted panes and templates from the trash.

Instructions

Manage soft-deleted panes + templates. ONE tool with an action enum: list | restore (pane id) | restore_template (template id|slug) | purge (pane id) | purge_template (template id|slug). purge bypasses the retention window and is permanent. Soft-deleted rows live in trash until the sweeper reclaims them.

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": {
      "action": "<action>"
    },
    "name": "trash"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`id`	No	Pane id (restore/purge) or template id\|slug (restore_template/purge_template).
`action`	Yes	Soft-delete trash. list: trashed panes + templates. restore/purge: un-trash or hard-delete a pane (id). restore_template/purge_template: same for a template (id\|slug). purge bypasses the retention window (permanent).

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Jun 27, 2026

TDQS

A4.5/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already mark destructiveHint=true, and the description adds critical nuance: 'purge bypasses the retention window and is permanent' and explains the lifecycle (soft-deleted rows live in trash until sweeper reclaims them). No contradiction with 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?

Description is four sentences, front-loaded with purpose, and every sentence adds unique value: overall function, action enum breakdown, special behavior of purge, and lifecycle note. No wasted words.

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?

Given the tool's complexity (5 actions, 2 params, no output schema), the description covers actions and id semantics well. However, it lacks explanation of what the 'list' action returns (e.g., format or structure), which would be helpful for an agent. Minor gap.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters5/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100%, giving a baseline of 3. The description adds significant meaning by explaining the action enum values in context (e.g., 'restore: un-trash a pane (id)') and clarifying that id is used specifically with restore/purge for panes or templates. This goes beyond the schema descriptions.

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?

Description clearly states 'Manage soft-deleted panes + templates' with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools by being the single entry point for all trash operations via an action enum, unlike other tools like delete_pane which likely handle direct deletion.

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?

Description implies usage context by listing actions and noting purge is permanent, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives like delete_pane or other sibling tools. No direct comparison or when-not guidance is provided.

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