Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
freeagent-mcp-server

freeagent-mcp-server

by samaxbytez
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Hybrid

freeagent_delete_expense

Destructive

Delete an expense from FreeAgent by expense ID to remove incorrect or unwanted expense records.

Instructions

Delete an expense from FreeAgent

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": {
      "expense_id": "<expense_id>"
    },
    "name": "freeagent_delete_expense"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
expense_idYesThe ID of the expense to delete

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv3.0.0
    • removedInput schema / additionalProperties
      Removed value: -false
  2. First observedv1.3.0

TDQS

B3.1/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, readOnlyHint=false and openWorldHint=false, so the description is not required to establish the safety profile. However, it adds nothing beyond them: no statement that the deletion is permanent, whether the expense record is recoverable, or what permissions are needed. For a destructive mutation the description could carry more weight.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler, which is efficient. It is arguably cut so short that it omits useful context, but as a matter of conciseness and structure there is nothing to trim.

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?

This is a destructive, irreversible-looking mutation with no output schema and no annotations explaining consequences beyond destructiveHint. Given that complexity, the definition should mention irreversibility and any confirmation or permission requirements, and it does none of that.

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?

There is a single parameter with 100% schema description coverage ('The ID of the expense to delete'), so the schema fully documents it and the baseline of 3 applies. The description adds no extra meaning about ID format or sourcing beyond what the schema already states.

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?

States a specific verb ('Delete') and resource ('an expense') plus the product context ('FreeAgent'), so the agent knows exactly what operation this performs. It does not compare itself to siblings, but the resource name alone distinguishes it from freeagent_delete_invoice, freeagent_delete_bill and the other delete tools.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

The word 'Delete' implies a destructive action, which is the main when-to-use signal, but there is no explicit guidance on when to prefer this over freeagent_update_expense, no prerequisites, and no warning about irreversibility or confirmation steps. Usage is only implied by the name and verb.

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