Skip to main content
Glama

bardo_document_revoke

DestructiveIdempotent

Revoke a previously issued document by resubmitting it with the original signature or session authentication. This action is irreversible and idempotent.

Instructions

Revoke a document you issued. Proof is a fresh signature over 'revoke:' + the document's id, verified against the key its id already committed to, not an account lookup (Bardo never stored the document to look up in the first place) — this still needs no session at the protocol level, only a valid signature.

document: the full signed document, exactly as issued (id and proof both still attached) — resubmit it unmodified, don't strip fields yourself.

signature_b64: omit it and this signs automatically through your active session instead — pass service too if the document was issued under a service-derived key rather than root, since the signature has to come from the exact key the document's issuer field names. Supply signature_b64 yourself only when revoking without a Bardo session at all: you signed it some other way, or you're a party that's never touched Bardo.

Idempotent — revoking an already-revoked id is a no-op, not an error. Irreversible: there is no un-revoke.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
serviceNo
documentYes
session_tokenNo
signature_b64No
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations indicate destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=true. The description adds critical context: the revocation is irreversible, requires a fresh cryptographic signature, and does not need a session at the protocol level. 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.

Conciseness4/5

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

Front-loaded with purpose, then explains mechanism and parameters. Some redundancy (e.g., repeated mention of no session), but all sentences add value. Could be slightly more concise, but overall well-structured.

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?

Covers main aspects: purpose, mechanism, parameter usage, idempotency, irreversibility. Missing return value description (no output schema) and session_token parameter detail, but sufficiently complete given complexity.

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 0%, so description must compensate. 'document' and 'signature_b64' are well explained; 'service' is partially explained; 'session_token' is not explicitly described (only implied via 'active session'). This partial coverage yields a score of 3.

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 'Revoke a document you issued' and explains the proof mechanism using a signature over 'revoke:' + document id. This distinguishes it from siblings like bardo_document_status, which checks status rather than revoking.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

The description explains when to provide signature_b64 versus omit for automatic signing via session, when to include service parameter, and notes idempotency and irreversibility. It does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use this tool, but the context is clear.

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/calebe/bardo'

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