Deal Radar MCP Server

delete_price_alert

Remove a product from your price alert watchlist by alert ID so you stop tracking it and no longer receive price-drop notifications.

Instructions

Remove a product from the price alert watchlist.

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": {
      "id": "<id>"
    },
    "name": "delete_price_alert"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`id`	Yes	The alert ID to remove (from list_watchlist)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Nov 9, 2026

TDQS

C2.9/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It implies a destructive mutation but does not say whether removal is permanent, reversible, or what happens if the ID does not exist, leaving the agent to guess at side effects.

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?

A single short sentence with the action front-loaded and no wasted wording. It is efficient, though its brevity is part of why behavioral detail is missing.

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 one-parameter tool with a fully documented schema and no output schema, the description is minimally sufficient. It is incomplete on irreversibility and error behavior, which matter for a delete operation with no annotations.

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 coverage is 100% and the schema already documents the single id parameter, including its source (list_watchlist). The description adds no format, validation, or sourcing detail beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 (Remove) and resource (a product from the price alert watchlist), which is clear enough to distinguish it from set_price_alert or list_watchlist. It stops short of explicitly naming a sibling or contrasting scope, so it is clear but not fully differentiated.

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?

The description gives no when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, and no mention of alternatives such as list_watchlist for discovering IDs or set_price_alert for creating alerts. The only hint about locating an ID lives in the schema, not the description.

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