mcp-romm

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

romm_remove_from_collection

Remove specific ROMs from a collection by providing the collection ID and list of ROM IDs, without affecting the collection itself.

Instructions

Remove one or more ROMs from a collection (without deleting the collection).

collection_id: The collection's ID (from romm_collections). rom_ids: List of ROM IDs to remove.

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>",
      "rom_ids": "<rom_ids>"
    },
    "name": "romm_remove_from_collection"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`collection_id`	Yes
`rom_ids`	Yes

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Addedv1.0.0Jun 23, 2026

TDQS

A3.9/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It states the action and what it does not do, but lacks details on side effects, permissions, or whether the operation is reversible. For a destructive action, more transparency would be beneficial.

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?

The description is concise (two sentences plus parameter explanations) and front-loaded with the core purpose. It could be slightly more streamlined, but is efficient.

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?

Given that an output schema exists, return values need not be explained. The description covers the essential information for a simple removal tool, though it could include a note that only associations are removed, not the ROMs themselves.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description adds meaning by explaining that collection_id comes from romm_collections and that rom_ids are the ROMs to remove, providing essential context beyond the schema types.

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 uses a specific verb ('remove') and resource ('ROMs from a collection'), and clarifies it does not delete the collection. This clearly distinguishes it from siblings like romm_add_to_collection and romm_delete_collection.

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?

The description implies usage by mentioning 'without deleting the collection', but does not explicitly contrast with alternatives like romm_delete_collection or provide when-to-use/when-not-to-use guidance.

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