Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
@vitrion/zentria-mcp

@vitrion/zentria-mcp

Official
by vitrionbv
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

delete-note

Destructive

Remove a sales note from Zentria CRM by ID to clean up outdated or incorrect entries and maintain accurate sales records.

Instructions

Delete a sales note (DELETE /api/public/sales/notes/{id}). Scope: sales:write.

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-note"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYesNote id.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.1

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

The annotations already mark destructiveHint=true, and the description adds the sales:write scope and HTTP DELETE method. It does not specify permanence, cascade effects, or behavior when the note does not exist, but the annotation covers the core risk.

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?

A single, information-dense sentence that includes the action, endpoint, and required scope with no waste.

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 one-parameter delete operation with a destructiveHint annotation and full schema coverage, the description is mostly complete. It could mention that deletion is permanent or note the response, but these are minor gaps given the tool's simplicity.

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 input schema already fully documents the single 'id' parameter as 'Note id.' with 100% coverage, so the description adds no additional parameter meaning. Baseline 3 applies.

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 ('Delete'), resource ('sales note'), HTTP method, and required scope. This clearly distinguishes it from siblings like update-note, get-note, and create-note.

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?

Usage is implied: use this tool when you need to delete a sales note. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives such as update-note for modification or archive for non-destructive removal.

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