Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
@kieksme/listmonk-mcp

@kieksme/listmonk-mcp

by kieksme
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Hybrid

Delete Unconfirmed Subscriptions

listmonk_delete_unconfirmed_subscriptions
Destructive

Permanently delete pending, unconfirmed double opt-in subscriptions older than a specified RFC3339 timestamp. This action is irreversible; confirm with the user before running.

Instructions

PERMANENTLY DELETES pending (unconfirmed double opt-in) subscriptions older than a given date. Irreversible; confirm with the user before calling.

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": {
      "before_date": "<before_date>"
    },
    "name": "listmonk_delete_unconfirmed_subscriptions"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
before_dateYesDelete unconfirmed (opt-in pending) subscriptions older than this RFC3339 timestamp, e.g. '2024-01-01T00:00:00Z' (not just a date).

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.3.0

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Beyond destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, the description discloses permanence and irreversibility, identifies the exact subscription state affected, and adds a user-confirmation safeguard. It does not further clarify side effects such as whether subscriber profiles remain untouched or what result is returned, but it provides strong safety context for this simple operation.

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, front-loaded sentences communicate the action, scope, irreversibility, and confirmation requirement without filler. The emphatic wording is proportionate to the tool's permanent destructive effect.

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

Completeness5/5

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

For a single-parameter destructive cleanup tool, the description, complete schema, and annotations collectively provide the target scope, cutoff format, safety profile, and invocation precondition needed to call it correctly. Explicit sibling alternatives or response details could help, but their absence does not leave a significant invocation gap.

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 before_date already documents the cutoff semantics, RFC3339 format, example, and date-only pitfall. The description's phrase "older than a given date" adds no parameter detail beyond that, so the fully covered-schema baseline applies.

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?

The description specifies the verb, resource, and scope: permanently deleting pending, unconfirmed double-opt-in subscriptions older than a cutoff. This precise targeting distinguishes it from siblings that delete subscribers, templates, lists, or other records, even though no sibling is named explicitly.

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?

It gives a clear use case—cleaning up aged, unconfirmed subscriptions—and explicitly requires user confirmation before invocation. It does not explain when to use a subscriber-deletion or query-based sibling instead, so the routing guidance is not exhaustive.

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