Skip to main content
Glama
debanjanbasu

grr

by debanjanbasu
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Rust
Local

drive.replies.delete

Deletes a reply from a Google Drive file comment thread, permanently removing the specified reply. Use to clean up or remove unwanted replies from comments.

Instructions

Deletes a reply. For more information, see Manage comments and replies [HTTP DELETE] — removes the resource; irreversible unless the API documents a trash/undo flow; refused under --readonly safety profiles. Returns the post-delete resource state (or empty) as JSON — request bodies are built from the typed parameters (typed flags win over the params map), or read whole from body_file Siblings over the same resource: create, get, list, update.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
queryNoExtra KEY=VALUE query pairs for endpoints whose parameters Discovery does not describe.
fileIdYes[URL path segment] The ID of the file.
paramsNoParameter map merged into the request; typed parameters win.
dry_runNoReturn the request that would be sent, without sending it.
replyIdYes[URL path segment] The ID of the reply.
body_fileNoRead the request body from this file ('-' for stdin) instead of building one from the parameters.
commentIdYes[URL path segment] The ID of the comment.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed3 schema fields changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / commentId / description
      Previous value: -"The ID of the comment."New value: +"[URL path segment] The ID of the comment."
    • changedInput schema / properties / fileId / description
      Previous value: -"The ID of the file."New value: +"[URL path segment] The ID of the file."
    • changedInput schema / properties / replyId / description
      Previous value: -"The ID of the reply."New value: +"[URL path segment] The ID of the reply."
  2. First observed

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

No annotations are provided, and the description carries the full burden well: it declares the operation irreversible (no trash/undo flow), notes it is refused under --readonly safety profiles, and describes the post-delete response as the resource state or empty. That is exactly the mutation context an agent needs before calling.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

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

The lead sentence is front-loaded and clean, but the second sentence is a long run-on cramming HTTP verb, irreversibility, safety-profile behavior, response shape, and body-construction rules together. It is dense rather than efficiently structured, and the docs link adds little.

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 destructive nested-resource tool with 7 params and no output schema, the description covers the return shape, irreversibility, dry_run safety, and parameter precedence. Only the interaction with the parent comment/file (e.g., whether deleting the last reply affects the comment) is unaddressed.

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 100%, so fileId/commentId/replyId, dry_run, params and body_file are already documented. The description restates the typed-params-beat-params-map and body_file precedence but adds no syntax, constraints, or examples beyond the schema, so the baseline 3 applies.

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?

Opens with a specific verb+resource ('Deletes a reply') and enumerates the sibling operations over the same resource (create, get, list, update), so an agent can place it precisely in the CRUD family without inspecting schemas.

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?

It lists sibling tools by name, which implies this is the removal option, but it never states when to delete vs. update a reply, nor any prerequisites (e.g., author ownership, comment resolution state). Usage is implied rather than guided.

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