Skip to main content
Glama
growsurf

GrowSurf MCP Server

Official

Delete Campaign Reward

growsurf_delete_campaign_reward
DestructiveIdempotent

Delete a campaign reward from a GrowSurf program: deactivates the reward, removes it from the reward set, and cleans up any connected upfront-discount coupons. Returns { id, success }.

Instructions

Delete a campaign reward (reward config) from your GrowSurf program. The reward is deactivated, removed from the program's reward set, and any connected upfront-discount coupons are cleaned up. campaignRewardId is the reward key. Returns { id, success }. Targets campaignId if you pass it, otherwise GROWSURF_CAMPAIGN_ID.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
campaignIdNoTarget program (campaign) id for this call. Defaults to GROWSURF_CAMPAIGN_ID when omitted. Program IDs also identify newly created programs without restarting the server.
campaignRewardIdYes

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idNoThe deleted campaign reward id.
successNoWhether the campaign reward was deleted.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv0.19.9
    • changedInput schema / properties / campaignId / description
      Previous value: -"Target program (campaign) id for this call. Defaults to GROWSURF_CAMPAIGN_ID when omitted. Pass the `id` returned by growsurf_create_campaign to configure or operate a program you just created, without restarting the server."New value: +"Target program (campaign) id for this call. Defaults to GROWSURF_CAMPAIGN_ID when omitted. Program IDs also identify newly created programs without restarting the server."
  2. First observedv0.12.2

TDQS

A4.1/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already flag destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=true, but the description adds real value by spelling out the concrete side effects: deactivation, removal from the reward set, and cleanup of connected upfront-discount coupons. It omits permissions/irreversibility, so not a 5.

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?

Three tight sentences, front-loaded with the action and its effects, then the identifier meaning, then the targeting fallback. No filler, though the return-value mention is slightly redundant given the output schema exists.

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 two-parameter destructive tool with an output schema present, the description covers the action, side effects, required key semantics, and targeting default. Only permissions/irreversibility context 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 50% and campaignRewardId has no schema description, so the description compensates by defining it as the reward key. It also restates the campaignId default behavior, which is useful even though the schema already documents it.

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 (Delete) plus resource (campaign reward / reward config) and names the parent program, distinguishing it from list/create/update_campaign_reward siblings. The scope is unambiguous.

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?

The description makes clear it's a destructive removal and explains the fallback target, but never says when to prefer it over alternatives like update_campaign_reward (deactivate without deleting) or when deletion is inappropriate. 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