Base.vn FastMCP Server

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

Base Wework Remove Department Manager

base_wework_remove_department_manager

Remove a department manager in Base.vn by providing the department ID and the manager's identifier. This updates department leadership by deleting the specified manager assignment.

Instructions

Xóa người quản lý ra khỏi phòng ban.

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": {
      "id": "<id>",
      "owners": "<owners>"
    },
    "name": "base_wework_remove_department_manager"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`id`	Yes
`owners`	Yes
`username`	No
`access_token`	No

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.0Sep 10, 2026

TDQS

C2.3/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure, but it only conveys that the tool performs a removal. It does not disclose permissions needed, reversibility, side effects of removing the last manager, or scoping behavior despite being a mutating tool.

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

Conciseness2/5

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

The description is one short sentence, but it mostly restates the tool's name in Vietnamese. It is under-specified rather than properly concise — it earns no additional value over the title or tool name.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness1/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Despite having an output schema, the full context gap is severe: no annotations, 0% parameter documentation, and a bare one-line description. An agent calling this mutating tool has no way to know what id/owners refer to or what effects to expect.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters1/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0%, and the description adds no meaning to any of the four parameters. The required fields 'id' and 'owners' are completely unexplained, so an agent cannot determine what they refer to or how they must be formatted.

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 'Xóa người quản lý ra khỏi phòng ban' (remove the manager from the department) states a specific verb and resource, matching the title. It implicitly distinguishes itself from siblings like base_wework_remove_department and base_wework_add_department_manager, though it does not name them explicitly.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as base_wework_add_department_manager or set_manager tools. No prerequisites, conditions, or exclusions are provided.

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

Deploy Server