Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Chispa MCP

Chispa MCP

by jeffercbs
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

Borrar lección

delete_lesson
Destructive

Permanently deletes a lesson and its quiz, flashcards, and games; requires explicit confirmation because the removal is irreversible.

Instructions

[Equipo del aula · irreversible] Borra definitivamente una lección con su quiz, tarjetas y juegos. Irreversible: pide confirmación explícita a la persona.

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": {
      "classroom_id": "<classroom_id>",
      "session_id": "<session_id>",
      "confirm": "<confirm>"
    },
    "name": "delete_lesson"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
confirmYesDebe ser true: la persona confirmó esta acción irreversible
session_idYesLección
classroom_idYesAula

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.2.0

TDQS

A3.9/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and openWorldHint=false, but the description adds real context beyond that: the deletion cascades to quiz, flashcards and games, it is permanent, and human confirmation is mandatory. The '[Equipo del aula]' tag also hints at a permission scope (classroom team) not captured by the annotations, though it stays terse and says nothing about effects on student progress.

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?

Two short, front-loaded sentences with the scope tag first and the irreversible/confirmation warning second; nothing is wasted. The bracketed tag is slightly opaque on its own but is clarified by the following clause.

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 destructive, three-parameter tool with no output schema, the definition covers cascade scope, permanence, and the confirmation gate, which is what an agent needs before calling. Remaining gaps (collateral effects such as student results or attached themes) are minor but real.

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 coverage is 100%, and the schema's own `confirm` description already states the boolean must be true after human confirmation, so the description adds little parameter-level detail. Baseline 3 is appropriate since the schema carries the parameter burden.

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?

Uses a specific verb plus resource ('Borra definitivamente una lección') and goes beyond the name by stating the cascade scope ('con su quiz, tarjetas y juegos'), which separates it from delete_module and delete_course. It does not explicitly name sibling alternatives, so it stops short of a 5.

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?

Gives a clear precondition for invoking it ('pide confirmación explícita a la persona') and marks it irreversible, so an agent knows the gating step. No alternatives or when-not-to-use cases are named, which keeps it below a 5.

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