Skip to main content
Glama

delete_eval_criterion

Delete a custom evaluation criterion and permanently remove all its historical eval scores. Only proceed after confirming past run scores are expendable.

Instructions

Delete a custom criterion in your account (Pro+ only, DELETE /v1/eval-criteria/:id, 204). Global defaults (account_id IS NULL) are structurally out of scope = 404; other accounts are 404 too. WARNING: all past eval_run score rows for this criterion (eval_scores) are physically deleted at the same time via ON DELETE CASCADE — historical comparisons and score trend analysis become permanently impossible. This is not a tool for an AI agent to call casually while tidying up criteria; only proceed when the user has explicitly confirmed the past run scores are not needed. If you only want to rename, using update_eval_criterion (full replace) with name + rubric + scaleMin + scaleMax preserves the history.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
criterionIdYesTarget criterion id (list_eval_criteria.criteria[].id)
Behavior5/5

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

Discloses the cascading delete of eval_scores, permanent loss of historical analysis, scope constraints (Pro+ only, 404 for global/other accounts), and the DELETE method and status code. No annotations present, so description fully covers behavior.

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?

Front-loaded with purpose and method, then provides warnings and alternative. Efficient but slightly lengthy due to necessary warnings; every sentence earns its place.

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?

Given destructive nature, no output schema, and single parameter, the description fully covers side effects, prerequisites, and behavior. Complete for agent decision-making.

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% so baseline is 3. The description does not add additional meaning beyond the schema's description of criterionId.

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 tool deletes a custom criterion, distinguishes it from update_eval_criterion for renaming, and specifies the verb 'delete' and resource 'custom criterion'.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Explicitly warns against casual use, advises only when user confirms not needing history, and directs to update_eval_criterion for renaming. Provides when-to-use and when-not-to-use guidance.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/argosvix/mcp-server'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server