Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
umbra

umbra

by lxchx
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Remote

Proxy Pool Remove

proxy_pool_remove

Deletes a proxy pool entry by ID to remove stale or unwanted proxies. Use the pool list tool to find valid entry IDs.

Instructions

Remove one entry by id. Use proxy_pool_list to see ids.

Ex: proxy_pool_remove('a1b2c3d4') → {"removed":true,"total":4}

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": {
      "entry_id": "<entry_id>"
    },
    "name": "proxy_pool_remove"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
entry_idYes

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the behavioral burden. It discloses the destructive action and gives an example successful response with removed and total, but it does not mention irreversibility, error behavior for unknown ids, or any permission/rate-limit considerations.

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?

The description is two short sentences plus a compact example. The action and prerequisite are front-loaded, and every sentence serves a clear purpose.

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 simple one-parameter removal tool with an output schema, the description provides enough context to call it correctly: the action, the id source, and an example response. It is only missing minor behavioral details such as what happens when the id does not exist.

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 description coverage for entry_id is 0%, so the description must compensate. It does so by saying 'by id,' showing an example string id, and directing the agent to proxy_pool_list to find valid ids, though it does not clarify invalid-id behavior.

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 states a specific verb and resource: 'Remove one entry by id.' It also scopes the operation to a single entry and points to proxy_pool_list for the required ids, making it easy to distinguish from bulk operations like proxy_pool_clear.

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 clear prerequisite context by saying 'Use proxy_pool_list to see ids,' which helps the agent obtain a valid entry_id before calling. It does not explicitly say when to use this versus proxy_pool_clear or what to do if the id is unknown, so it falls short of 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