inoreader-mcp

Remove saved web pages

remove_saved_web_pages

DestructiveIdempotent

Delete saved web pages by article ID to clear unneeded items from Inoreader while preserving starred pages and those tagged Keep.

Instructions

Remove saved web pages by article ID. Use get_saved_web_pages with filter 'removable' to find candidates (pages that are neither starred nor tagged 'Keep'). To protect a page from cleanup without starring it, use manage_tags with add_tag='Keep'. Base cost is 1 Zone 2 + 1 Zone 1 per 50 pages, with up to a second round for observed shortfalls (preflighted); reports only removals confirmed on the server. Base costs exclude safe-read retries (up to 4 attempts, each counted); honor cached status/cooldown. Never blindly replay uncertain writes. See inoreader://usage for limits, URI examples and prompts.

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": {
      "article_ids": "<article_ids>"
    },
    "name": "remove_saved_web_pages"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`article_ids`	Yes	Article IDs of saved web pages to remove

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Addedv1.6.1Nov 3, 2026

TDQS

A4.5/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Goes well beyond the annotations by disclosing the cost model (1 Zone 2 + 1 Zone 1 per 50 pages), a possible preflighted second round for shortfalls, server-confirmed-only reporting, and retry/cooldown semantics. It also warns against blindly replaying uncertain writes. It stops short of describing the per-item failure/partial-success shape, but the operational profile is unusually well covered.

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?

Front-loads the action and the candidate-discovery step, then packs cost and retry caveats compactly. It is dense but every sentence carries operational information; the pointer to inoreader://usage keeps the deep reference out of the body.

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?

No output schema exists, and the description partially compensates by stating that only server-confirmed removals are reported. Combined with the cost, retry, and cooldown guidance, an agent has enough to invoke this destructive tool safely, though the response shape on partial failure remains implicit.

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% for the single article_ids parameter, so the baseline is 3. The description adds real value by explaining where valid IDs come from (get_saved_web_pages with 'removable') and tying the per-50-page cost band to the schema's maxItems of 50.

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?

"Remove saved web pages by article ID" gives a specific verb, resource, and the identifier type used to address it. It is immediately distinguishable from get_saved_web_pages and batch_manage_tags siblings.

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 routes the agent: use get_saved_web_pages with filter 'removable' to find candidates, and manage_tags with add_tag='Keep' to protect a page instead of starring it. Both the when and the alternative are stated, with the exclusion condition (starred or 'Keep'-tagged pages are not removable) spelled out.

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