Purelymail MCP

Delete password reset method

delete_password_reset_method

Destructive

Deletes a specified password reset method from a Purelymail user account, removing a recovery option the user no longer needs or that should be revoked for security.

Instructions

Deletes one of a user's password reset methods.

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": "<userName>",
      "target": "<target>"
    },
    "name": "delete_password_reset_method"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`target`	Yes	Target from list_password_reset_methods
`userName`	Yes	Full username, e.g. "user@domain.com"

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.1Nov 13, 2026

TDQS

C2.9/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, readOnlyHint=false and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is known from structured data. The description adds nothing beyond that: it does not say whether the method can be recovered, what happens if it is the user's last method, or what permissions are required for this account-level mutation.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

One short sentence, front-loaded with the verb and with zero filler. Its brevity borders on under-specification, but nothing in the text is redundant or wasted.

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

Completeness2/5

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

This is a destructive, open-world mutation with no output schema, yet the description says nothing about irreversibility, required authorization, error conditions, or the effect on a user who loses their last reset method. For a delete operation, it leaves an agent without the context needed to use it safely.

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%, and the schema already explains that 'target' must come from list_password_reset_methods and that 'userName' is a full email-style username. The description repeats no parameter detail but the baseline of 3 applies because the schema carries the semantics.

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 ('Deletes') and resource ('password reset methods') scoped to a single user, which separates it from the list/upsert siblings. It stops short of explicitly naming those alternatives, so the differentiation comes mostly from the name and verb rather than the description text.

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 guidance on when to call this versus 'upsert_password_reset_method' (to replace) or 'list_password_reset_methods' (to inspect before deleting). No prerequisites, no warning about what state the user is left in, and no mention of whether deletion is reversible.

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