Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Claudegram

Claudegram

by sanjar-x
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

clear_draft

Destructive

Clear a draft message in a chat and synchronize the change across all devices.

Instructions

Очистить draft в чате (синхронизация на все устройства).

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": {
      "chat": "<chat>"
    },
    "name": "clear_draft"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
chatYes

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.1.0

TDQS

B3.1/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false. The description adds the useful detail that clearing a draft synchronizes across all devices, but it does not discuss irreversibility, permission requirements, or any other side effects beyond this sync note.

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 a single short sentence that states the action and a key side effect. It is front-loaded, direct, and free of unnecessary words, making it easy to parse quickly.

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?

While an output schema exists and annotations cover safety, the description fails to clarify the 'chat' parameter, which is essential for invocation. The overall context is minimal, leaving ambiguity about how to specify the chat target and what the underlying behavior fully entails.

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

Parameters1/5

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

The sole parameter 'chat' has no description in the schema (0% coverage) and the description does not explain what format or value it expects. The anyOf integer/string type is ambiguous, and the agent receives no guidance on what constitutes a valid chat identifier.

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 uses the specific verb 'Очистить' (clear) with the resource 'draft в чате' (draft in chat), unambiguously identifying the action. It distinguishes itself clearly from sibling tools like save_draft, get_drafts, and delete_message by focusing on drafts specifically.

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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention prerequisites, exclusions, or differentiate from similar tools like save_draft or get_drafts. The implied usage is clear but there is no explicit contextual advice.

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