Cookidoo MCP Server

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

Remove From Collection

remove_from_collection

DestructiveIdempotent

Removes recipes from a custom Cookidoo collection without deleting the recipes themselves, so you can reorganize collections while keeping recipe data intact.

Instructions

Remove recipes from one of the user's custom collections. The recipes themselves are not deleted.

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": {
      "collection_id": "<collection_id>",
      "recipe_ids": "<recipe_ids>"
    },
    "name": "remove_from_collection"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`recipe_ids`	Yes	IDs of recipes in that collection
`collection_id`	Yes	ID from list_collections (kind="custom")

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv2.0.0Nov 10, 2026

TDQS

A3.8/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds real value beyond them by disambiguating what 'destructive' means here — only collection membership is removed, not the recipe itself — which is exactly the anxiety an agent would have before calling a destructive tool. It stops short of mentioning permissions, effects on other collections, or partial failure 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?

Two short sentences, front-loaded with the action and immediately followed by the reassurance. Nothing is wasted or buried.

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?

With an output schema present, rich annotations, and fully documented parameters, the description only needs to convey intent and the key semantic caveat, which it does. It omits batch behavior when some IDs are invalid and any permission requirement, minor gaps against otherwise strong structured coverage.

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 description coverage is 100%, so both parameters are already documented, including the 'ID from list_collections (kind="custom")' hint and the 50-item cap. The description adds only the notion of multiple recipes (plural), which the schema array already conveys, so this is baseline territory.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description gives a specific verb (remove) and a specific resource (recipes in the user's custom collections), and adds the important clarification that the recipes themselves survive. It does not explicitly distinguish itself from nearby siblings such as remove_from_meal_plan or remove_recipes_from_shopping_list, but 'custom collections' is a reasonably distinct target.

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?

Usage is implied: use this when pruning recipes out of a custom collection. There is no explicit when-not guidance, no mention of the alternative removal tools, and no prerequisites stated (e.g. that the collection must be custom, which is only encoded in the schema).

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