Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
MEME

MEME

by renniyy
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

Enforce retention (admin)

enforce_retention

Deletes expired history, feedback, reports, and raw signals according to retention policy, optionally limited to specified tenants, to keep stored data within required limits.

Instructions

Runs the retention enforcer: deletes expired history/feedback/reports/raw signals per policy.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "enforce_retention"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
tenantsNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

C2.9/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden, and it does disclose the key fact that this is destructive and names the data classes destroyed. However, it omits irreversibility, permission requirements, whether a dry-run exists, and whether an omitted tenant scope means 'all tenants' — all critical for a delete operation.

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?

One compact sentence with the destructive action front-loaded; nothing is padded. Slight redundancy in 'Runs the retention enforcer' echoing the tool name, but overall efficient.

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

Completeness2/5

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

For a destructive admin operation with no annotations, no output schema, and an undocumented parameter, the description is too thin. It should state the blast radius, default scope, and reversibility to let an agent invoke it safely.

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 coverage is 0% for the single optional 'tenants' parameter, and the description never mentions it at all. The agent cannot tell whether supplying tenants narrows the purge to those tenants or excludes them, nor what happens when the array is omitted.

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?

Names a specific verb ('deletes') and enumerates the affected resources (history, feedback, reports, raw signals) governed by policy. The agent knows exactly what the tool does; the only shortfall is that it doesn't contrast itself with any sibling or explain what 'per policy' resolves to.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance, no mention of prerequisites (the title implies admin rights but the description never says so), and no alternative or exclusion. An agent must guess whether this is a routine scheduled job or a manual admin action.

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