Skip to main content
Glama

twining_dismiss

Remove blackboard entries by ID to clean up false-positive warnings, resolved items, or other noise. Returns which IDs were dismissed and which were not found.

Instructions

Remove specific blackboard entries by ID. Use this to clean up false-positive warnings, resolved entries, or other noise. Returns which IDs were dismissed and which were not found.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idsYesEntry IDs to remove from the blackboard
reasonNoWhy these entries are being dismissed (logged but not stored)

Implementation Reference

  • The handler for the twining_dismiss tool which calls engine.dismiss(args.ids).
    async (args) => {
      try {
        const result = await engine.dismiss(args.ids);
        return toolResult(result);
      } catch (e) {
        if (e instanceof TwiningError) {
          return toolError(e.message, e.code);
        }
        return toolError(
          e instanceof Error ? e.message : "Unknown error",
          "INTERNAL_ERROR",
        );
      }
  • The input schema for the twining_dismiss tool, validating entry IDs and reason.
    {
      description:
        "Remove specific blackboard entries by ID. Use this to clean up false-positive warnings, resolved entries, or other noise. Returns which IDs were dismissed and which were not found.",
      inputSchema: {
        ids: z
          .array(z.string())
          .min(1)
          .describe("Entry IDs to remove from the blackboard"),
        reason: z
          .string()
          .optional()
          .describe("Why these entries are being dismissed (logged but not stored)"),
      },
  • Registration of the twining_dismiss tool on the MCP server.
    server.registerTool(
      "twining_dismiss",
      {
        description:
          "Remove specific blackboard entries by ID. Use this to clean up false-positive warnings, resolved entries, or other noise. Returns which IDs were dismissed and which were not found.",
        inputSchema: {
          ids: z
            .array(z.string())
            .min(1)
            .describe("Entry IDs to remove from the blackboard"),
          reason: z
            .string()
            .optional()
            .describe("Why these entries are being dismissed (logged but not stored)"),
        },
      },
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It effectively describes the mutation action ('Remove'), specifies what happens to the 'reason' parameter ('logged but not stored'), and outlines the return behavior ('Returns which IDs were dismissed and which were not found'). However, it doesn't mention potential side effects, permissions needed, or error conditions.

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?

Two sentences with zero waste: the first states purpose and usage context, the second describes return behavior. Every element serves a clear purpose, and the description is appropriately sized for a 2-parameter tool.

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?

For a mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description does well by explaining the action, usage context, parameter handling, and return behavior. However, it lacks details about potential side effects, error conditions, or what constitutes valid IDs, leaving some gaps in completeness.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents both parameters thoroughly. The description adds marginal value by clarifying the 'reason' parameter's handling ('logged but not stored'), but doesn't provide additional syntax, format, or constraint details beyond what the schema provides. Baseline 3 is appropriate when schema does the heavy lifting.

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 specific action ('Remove specific blackboard entries by ID') and resource ('blackboard entries'), distinguishing it from siblings like twining_archive or twining_prune_graph. It goes beyond the tool name by specifying the target resource and mechanism.

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 provides clear context for when to use this tool ('to clean up false-positive warnings, resolved entries, or other noise'), but does not explicitly state when not to use it or name specific alternatives among the many sibling tools. The guidance is helpful but not exhaustive.

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/daveangulo/twining-mcp'

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