Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
yandex-marketing-mcp

yandex-marketing-mcp

by skiddgoddamn
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

yd_metrika_segment_delete

Delete a Yandex Metrika segment by providing counter and segment IDs to remove unused or incorrect audience segments.

Instructions

Delete a segment.

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": {
      "counter_id": "<counter_id>",
      "segment_id": "<segment_id>"
    },
    "name": "yd_metrika_segment_delete"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
counter_idYesCounter ID
segment_idYesSegment ID

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv2.0.0

TDQS

C2.8/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are present, so the description must fully convey behavioral traits. It only says 'Delete a segment,' omitting details like whether the deletion is permanent, requires specific permissions, or affects dependent data. This is insufficient.

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 a single short sentence, which is concise but lacks necessary detail. It does not fully earn its place as it fails to provide value beyond the tool name.

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?

Given the lack of output schema, annotations, and the presence of two parameters, the description is incomplete. It does not explain return behavior, potential errors, or the context of Yandex Metrika, making it insufficient for an agent to use correctly.

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?

The schema already describes both parameters (counter_id and segment_id) with 100% coverage. The description adds no additional meaning beyond what is in the schema, so a baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 verb and resource: 'Delete a segment.' Given the sibling tools (yd_metrika_segment_create, etc.), it's clear this refers to Yandex Metrika segments. However, it could be more specific by explicitly naming the product (Yandex Metrika).

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives like yd_metrika_segment_update or yd_metrika_segment_create. No context about prerequisites or consequences is provided.

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