Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
agy-mcp

agy-mcp

by cyeezy08
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

agy_delete_skill

Permanently remove an installed skill by name. Confirms success and returns the removed skill's name for verification.

Instructions

Permanently remove an installed skill.

Return Format

{"success": bool, "name": str}

Examples

agy_delete_skill("old-skill")

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": {
      "skill_name": "<skill_name>"
    },
    "name": "agy_delete_skill"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
ctxNo
skill_nameYes

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.2.0

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral burden. It clearly discloses the destructive and irreversible nature via 'Permanently remove' and gives the return format. It does not mention permissions or effects on dependent configurations, but for a simple deletion tool the essential behavior is transparent.

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 compact and front-loaded with the core action, then supplements with a return format and a concrete example. Every section earns its place with no fluff or repetition.

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 return format and example cover the happy path, but the optional ctx parameter is undocumented and there is no mention of error cases, idempotency, or prerequisites beyond 'installed skill'. For a simple delete tool this is usable but not fully complete.

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 description coverage is 0%, and the description does not explicitly explain skill_name or the optional ctx parameter. The example 'agy_delete_skill("old-skill")' implies that the argument is the skill name, but meaning is left mostly to inference rather than stated.

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 states a specific verb ('remove'), resource ('skill'), and permanence ('permanently'), making the tool's purpose unmistakable. It clearly differentiates from siblings like agy_list_skills, agy_read_skill, and agy_install_skill.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

The description implies the tool is for deleting an installed skill, which is clear enough, but it does not explicitly state when to prefer this over alternatives or caution against using it on skills still in use. No when-not-to-use guidance is provided.

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