Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
radarr-mcp

radarr-mcp

by arr-mcps
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Remote

radarr_delete_blocklist

Destructive

Delete a blocklisted release by ID to remove it from Radarr's blocklist, clearing the restriction.

Instructions

Delete blocklisted releases. DESTRUCTIVE: this deletes data.

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": "radarr_delete_blocklist"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYes

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

B3/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

The description adds the warning 'DESTRUCTIVE: this deletes data,' but this merely echoes the annotation destructiveHint=true without adding new behavioral context. No additional risks, side effects, or constraints beyond the annotation are disclosed.

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: one action sentence plus a clear warning. Every word earns its place, and it is appropriately sized for a simple delete operation. No redundancy or fluff.

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?

The tool is simple with one parameter and an output schema, and the destructive annotation partially covers safety. However, the description lacks essential usage context (how to get the id, when to use individual vs bulk delete) and does not explain the parameter, making it only marginally complete.

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

Parameters1/5

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

The input schema describes a single 'id' parameter with no description, and the description does not explain what the id refers to (e.g., a blocklist entry ID) or how it is used. With 0% schema description coverage, the description fails to compensate, leaving the parameter semantically unexplained.

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 action ('Delete') and the resource ('blocklisted releases'), which is specific and unambiguous. It also distinguishes from sibling tools like radarr_bulk_delete_blocklist by using the singular form, and the name reinforces this.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus radarr_bulk_delete_blocklist or how to obtain the required id. The description only states what the tool does, not the circumstances for choosing it.

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