skylight-mcp

skylight_delete_list_item

Destructive

Remove an item from a Skylight list by providing frame, list, and item IDs. Use it to clean up or correct entries on your Skylight Calendar family hub.

Instructions

Delete a list item from a Skylight frame.

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": {
      "listId": "<listId>",
      "itemId": "<itemId>"
    },
    "name": "skylight_delete_list_item"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`itemId`	Yes
`listId`	Yes
`frameId`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedv1.0.1Sep 19, 2026

changedInput schema / $schema

Previous value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"New value: +"https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema"

First observedv0.4.6Jul 30, 2026

TDQS

C2.7/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds nothing on top: it doesn't say the deletion is irreversible, whether it requires ownership/permissions, or how the optional frameId affects behavior. Zero value beyond structured fields.

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 front-loaded sentence with no filler. It is efficient, though the brevity tips into under-specification rather than disciplined conciseness.

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?

For a destructive, open-world mutation with no output schema and 0% parameter documentation, the description is too thin. It omits irreversibility, parameter meaning, and the single-vs-batch distinction the sibling list makes critical.

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

Parameters2/5

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

Schema coverage is 0% across three parameters, so the description carries the full burden and largely fails it. The phrase 'list item ... from a Skylight frame' loosely hints at itemId/listId/frameId roles, but no format, requiredness, or the meaning of the optional frameId is conveyed.

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?

The description names a specific verb (delete) and resource (list item) scoped to a Skylight frame, so an agent immediately knows the operation. It does not, however, distinguish itself from the near-identical sibling skylight_delete_list_items (plural, batch), leaving the singular-vs-batch choice to inference.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, and no mention of alternatives such as skylight_delete_list_items or skylight_clear_list for bulk removal. The agent must guess whether this handles single items only.

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

Deploy Server