armorcode-mcp

Delete Scan Scheduler

armorcode_delete_scan_scheduler

Delete a scan scheduler configuration. Use dry run to test before actual deletion.

Instructions

Delete scheduler config. dryRun defaults true.

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": {
      "schedulerId": "<schedulerId>"
    },
    "name": "armorcode_delete_scan_scheduler"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`dryRun`	No
`schedulerId`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.1.0Jul 9, 2026

TDQS

C2.5/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of disclosure. It only mentions that dryRun defaults to true, but does not describe the actual effect of the deletion (e.g., irreversible? permissions required? side effects). This is insufficient for a mutation tool.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is very short (two sentences), but it lacks important details. It is concise but not effectively structured for an AI agent, and the brevity comes at the cost of completeness.

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

Completeness1/5

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

Given no output schema and no annotations, the description is critically incomplete. It fails to explain the effect of deletion, the meaning of dryRun, or the required input (schedulerId) beyond the schema. The agent would be left with many unknowns.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters2/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It clarifies the default value of dryRun, but does not explain the purpose of either parameter (schedulerId is not described, dryRun's role is unclear). Minimal value added beyond the schema.

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 clearly states the action ('Delete') and the resource ('scheduler config'). Although brief, it distinguishes the tool from siblings like 'armorcode_list_scan_schedulers' which is about listing, not deleting.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., when to dry run vs delete directly). The description only notes the default value of dryRun, but does not explain the context of use.

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

Deploy Server