Skip to main content
Glama
dokaNc

IlluGen MCP

by dokaNc
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

Remove annotation

annotation_remove
Destructive

Delete a group or note annotation from an IlluGen node graph by path, kind, and index. Fails if the index does not exist and writes the project file in place.

Instructions

Deletes one group or note annotation from the node graph.

The indexes of later annotations of the same kind shift down by one: re-read project_summary before removing
another. Fails if the index does not exist. Writes the project file in place.
Returns {"ok": true}.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
kindYesKind of annotation to remove.
pathYesAbsolute path of the .illugen project file.
graphNoGraph to work in: empty for the top-level graph, or the id or label of a Node_Subgraph node ('outer/inner' for nested subgraphs).
indexYesIndex in project_summary.annotations.groups or .notes (0-based).

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed5 schema fields changedv0.1.2
    • addedInput schema / properties / graph / description
      Added value: +"Graph to work in: empty for the top-level graph, or the id or label of a Node_Subgraph node ('outer/inner' for nested subgraphs)."
    • addedInput schema / properties / index / description
      Added value: +"Index in project_summary.annotations.groups or .notes (0-based)."
    • addedInput schema / properties / kind / description
      Added value: +"Kind of annotation to remove."
    • addedInput schema / properties / kind / enum
      Added value: +[
+  "group",
+  "note"
+]
    • addedInput schema / properties / path / description
      Added value: +"Absolute path of the .illugen project file."
  2. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4.7/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already flag destructive/non-idempotent/write, and the description adds real context beyond that: index-shift semantics for later annotations of the same kind, the failure mode on a nonexistent index, in-place project-file write, and the return shape. This is exactly the extra behavioral detail a mutation tool needs.

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?

Four tightly packed sentences, each carrying distinct information (action, index-shift caveat, failure condition, write/return). Front-loaded with the core action, zero filler.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

With no output schema, the description supplies return values ('{"ok": true}'), failure behavior, side effects (in-place file write), and the stateful index consequence. Nothing an agent needs to call it correctly and safely is missing.

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

Parameters4/5

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

Schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3, but the description earns extra by explaining the consequence of 'index' (later same-kind annotations shift down by one) which enriches how the agent should treat that parameter across repeated calls.

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?

States a specific verb (deletes) and a precisely scoped resource (one group or note annotation from the node graph). An agent can distinguish it immediately from the annotation_add sibling and the node/link removal tools.

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?

Provides actionable sequencing guidance: 're-read project_summary before removing another' after an index shift, and states the failure condition (index does not exist). It lacks an explicit when-not/alternative statement, but the workflow context is clear.

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