Rolli MCP

delete_agent_run

Soft-deletes a completed or failed Rolli Agent run, hiding it from listings while keeping the record for audit. Cancel a running run first.

Instructions

Soft-delete a Rolli Agent run. The record remains in the database for audit purposes but is hidden from listings. Only works on completed or failed runs — cancel the run first if it is still running.

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": {
      "id": "<id>"
    },
    "name": "delete_agent_run"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`id`	Yes	Run UUID

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed2 schema fields changedv1.5.0Nov 4, 2026

removedInput schema / additionalProperties
```
Removed value: -false
```

addedInput schema / properties / id / pattern

Added value: +"^([0-9a-fA-F]{8}-[0-9a-fA-F]{4}-[1-8][0-9a-fA-F]{3}-[89abAB][0-9a-fA-F]{3}-[0-9a-fA-F]{12}|00000000-0000-0000-0000-000000000000|ffffffff-ffff-ffff-ffff-ffffffffffff)$"

Addedv1.3.0Jun 3, 2026

TDQS

A4.4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations supplied, the description carries the full burden and does well: it discloses that deletion is soft (record retained for audit, hidden from listings) and that the operation is gated on terminal run state. It stops short of stating permission/auth requirements, whether the deletion can be undone, or what a success response looks like — a meaningful but not fatal gap 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.

Conciseness5/5

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

Three short sentences with zero filler; the operation is front-loaded, followed by the persistence consequence, then the precondition. Every sentence contributes distinct information.

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 single-parameter mutation with no output schema, the description covers the essentials: effect on data, visibility consequence, and the state guard. Only permission requirements and the success/error surface are left unstated, which is minor at this complexity.

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% and the single 'id' parameter is already documented as 'Run UUID' with a strict UUID pattern, so the description adds no format or scope meaning beyond it. The baseline of 3 applies when the schema does the parameter work.

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 ('Soft-delete a Rolli Agent run') and immediately qualifies it with the soft-delete semantics, so an agent knows exactly what operation is performed. Naming the running-state restriction also implicitly separates it from cancel_agent_run and update_agent_run.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

Explicit preconditions: 'Only works on completed or failed runs' tells the agent when the call will fail, and 'cancel the run first if it is still running' names the alternative action for the excluded case. Both when-to-use and when-not-to-use are covered without inference.

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