TimeTree MCP Server

delete_virtual_member

DestructiveIdempotent

Remove a virtual member from a calendar by providing the calendar ID and the virtual member UUID; the deletion cannot be undone.

Instructions

Remove a virtual member from a calendar. Cannot be undone. Get virtual_member_uuid from get_calendar_virtual_members (the uuid, not the id).

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": {
      "calendar_id": "<calendar_id>",
      "virtual_member_uuid": "<virtual_member_uuid>"
    },
    "name": "delete_virtual_member"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`calendar_id`	Yes	The calendar ID from list_calendars (numeric string; numbers are also accepted)
`virtual_member_uuid`	Yes	The uuid from get_calendar_virtual_members

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`message`	No
`success`	Yes
`deleted_virtual_member_uuid`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Addedv0.7.0Oct 22, 2026

TDQS

A4.2/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and readOnlyHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description reinforces this with 'Cannot be undone' and adds the useful pointer that the identifier comes from a lookup call, but it says nothing about required permissions, side effects on events already created by that member, or error behavior.

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?

Three short sentences, no filler, with the action and irreversibility front-loaded before the identifier lookup hint. Every sentence carries information the agent needs.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need no explanation, and annotations cover the safety profile for this two-parameter mutation. The only gap is the absence of any note on downstream effects (whether existing events survive the removal), which matters for a destructive delete.

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 credit by warning 'the uuid, not the id' — a real disambiguation between two similarly named identifiers that the schema descriptions alone do not flag.

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 and resource ('Remove a virtual member from a calendar') with unambiguous scope. It is clearly distinct from the generic delete_event and from its siblings update_virtual_member and create_virtual_member, without the agent needing to open any schema.

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?

Names the prerequisite step explicitly: fetch the identifier from get_calendar_virtual_members before calling. It does not address when to prefer update_virtual_member or how to handle members still assigned to events, so it falls short of explicit exclusions/alternatives.

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