Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
mealie-mcp

mealie-mcp

by ni-c
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

Revoke a public share link

delete_share_token
DestructiveIdempotent

Revoke a recipe share link to stop public access. Confirm the action to remove the share token and make the recipe unreadable.

Instructions

Revokes a share link, so the recipe is no longer readable through it. Asks a person first; where the client cannot show a dialog, call once to receive a token and again with it.

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": {
      "token_id": "<token_id>"
    },
    "name": "delete_share_token"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
token_idYesShare token UUID, from list_share_tokens
confirm_tokenNoConfirmation token from a previous call of this tool with the same arguments. Omit on the first call.

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
truncatedNoPresent only when entries were dropped to fit the budget.
revoked_token_idYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed3 schema fields changedv0.4.0
    • changedInput schema / $schema
      Previous value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"New value: +"https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema"
    • addedInput schema / properties / confirm_token
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Confirmation token from a previous call of this tool with the same arguments. Omit on the first call.",
+  "maxLength": 512,
+  "minLength": 1,
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "$schema": "https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema",
+  "additionalProperties": true,
+  "properties": {
+    "revoked_token_id": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "truncated": {
+      "additionalProperties": true,
+      "description": "Present only when entries were dropped to fit the budget.",
+      "properties": {
+        "follow_up": {
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        "reason": {
+          "type": "string"
+        }
+      },
+      "required": [
+        "reason",
+        "follow_up"
+      ],
+      "type": "object"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "revoked_token_id"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}
  2. First observedv0.1.1

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

The description transparently discloses the destructive nature (revoking) and the confirmation requirement, which aligns with the destructiveHint and idempotentHint annotations. It does not contradict annotations and adds specific behavioral detail about the two-step token process.

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 sentences with no redundant wording. It is compact and directly to the point, making it easy for an agent to parse.

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?

The description covers the essential procedural context (confirmation flow) and the primary effect of the action. It does not describe the output schema or error conditions, but those are not critical for initiating the call, and the description is sufficient given the simple two-parameter interface.

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%, and the description explains the confirm_token parameter by describing the token-receiving process. Token_id is already well-described in the schema as coming from list_share_tokens. The description adds useful context for the confirmation parameter.

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 clearly states the action ('Revokes a share link') and the effect ('so the recipe is no longer readable through it'). This unambiguously identifies the tool's purpose.

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?

The description provides explicit guidance on the confirmation flow: it requires a person's consent and, in the absence of a dialog, instructs the agent to call once to obtain a token and call again with it. This is useful operational guidance, though it does not contrast with alternative tools.

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