Skip to main content
Glama
googlarz

Signal MCP

by googlarz
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

leave_group

DestructiveIdempotent

Leave a Signal group and optionally promote a new admin or delete local group data; the group remains for other members. Use terminate_group to end it for everyone.

Instructions

Leave a Signal group yourself: sends a quit message to all members and removes you from the member list; the group continues for everyone else. To end the group for all members use terminate_group instead. group_id (required, from list_groups). admins: E.164 numbers of members to promote first — if you are the group's ONLY admin you must name one, otherwise signal-cli refuses. delete (default false): also delete the group's local data after leaving. You can only come back by being re-added or via an invite link. Returns status and group_id.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
adminsNoMembers to make admin before leaving — required if you are the only admin
deleteNoAlso delete all local group data after leaving
group_idYesGroup ID to leave (get from list_groups)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changedv1.40.1
    • addedInput schema / properties / admins
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Members to make admin before leaving — required if you are the only admin",
+  "items": {
+    "type": "string"
+  },
+  "type": "array"
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / delete
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Also delete all local group data after leaving",
+  "type": "boolean"
+}
  2. Changed1 schema field changedv0.1.2
    • changedInput schema / properties / group_id / description
      Previous value: -"Group ID to leave"New value: +"Group ID to leave (get from list_groups)"
  3. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4.8/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint and idempotentHint, but the description adds far more: a quit message is sent to all members, you are removed from the member list, the group survives for others, naming an admin is mandatory when you are the sole admin, and the irreversible re-entry constraint (re-added or invite link). This is rich context well beyond the structured fields.

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

Conciseness4/5

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

Purpose and the sibling alternative are front-loaded in the first sentence, followed by parameters and the return value. Dense but every clause carries information; only marginal tightening is possible.

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?

No output schema exists, yet the description states the return value ('status and group_id'), covers all three parameters including defaults, and discloses the admin-promotion prerequisite and re-entry consequences. Complete for an agent to invoke correctly.

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 baseline would be 3, but the description goes further by giving the 'delete' default (false) and the consequence of setting it, which the schema does not state, and reinforces the group_id provenance. It slightly exceeds what the schema already provides.

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 ('Leave a Signal group yourself') and precisely distinguishes the scope from its closest sibling by naming terminate_group as the tool for ending the group for everyone. An agent can select between them without opening either schema.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

Explicitly names the alternative (terminate_group) and the condition that selects it, plus a hard prerequisite ('if you are the group's ONLY admin you must name one, otherwise signal-cli refuses'). When-to-use, when-not-to-use, and the failure mode are all covered.

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