Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Nerdit

Nerdit

Official
by nerdit-ai
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

remove_schedule

Removes a schedule and its run history from a deployed app, idempotently. A schedule still declared in nerdit.toml comes back on the next deploy.

Instructions

Remove a schedule and its run history. Idempotent (removed: false).

    A schedule still declared in nerdit.toml comes back on the next deploy.

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": {
      "name": "<name>",
      "schedule_name": "<schedule_name>"
    },
    "name": "remove_schedule"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameYesName (or row id) of an existing deployed app — only kind 'service' can be exposed: ``share_service``/``add_domain`` refuse a model or database with 422 ``*.kind_unsupported``, while the remove tools just find nothing to undo.
schedule_nameYesSchedule name: lowercase letters, digits and '-', 1-32 characters, starting with a letter (e.g. ``morning``); the app receives it as ``X-Nerdit-Schedule``.
idempotency_keyNoCaller-chosen key: a retry with the same key replays the first result instead of acting twice. Omit and a fresh key is minted per call, so each call acts.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv0.9.3

TDQS

A3.9/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does well: it discloses that run history is destroyed (irreversible data loss), defines idempotent behavior via the ``removed: false`` result field, and warns about redeploy resurrection. It omits any mention of required permissions or what happens when the schedule doesn't exist.

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?

Three short, front-loaded sentences with no filler; the destructive-scope information comes first. The leftover indentation and stray backticks around ``removed: false`` add minor formatting noise.

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 3-parameter removal tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description covers destruction scope, idempotency, and the declarative-config caveat. It leaves the not-found behavior for the agent to infer from the parameter documentation rather than stating it directly.

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%, so the schema fully documents name, schedule_name, and idempotency_key. The description's idempotency note partially overlaps the idempotency_key parameter but adds no syntax or format guidance beyond what the schema already supplies.

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 opens with a specific verb+resource: "Remove a schedule". It also states the extra scope — "and its run history" — which is not obvious from the name. It doesn't differentiate against siblings such as add_schedule or apply_config, so it falls short of a 5.

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?

"A schedule still declared in nerdit.toml comes back on the next deploy" is a genuine when-not-to-use caveat that warns the agent the deletion may be undone. It stops short of explicitly routing the agent to apply_config or another tool for declaratively-managed schedules.

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