Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
sylvia-iot-mcp

sylvia-iot-mcp

by woofdogtw
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Remote

device_route_delete

Delete a device route by providing its route ID, removing the routing configuration from the IoT platform to prevent unintended data forwarding.

Instructions

Delete a device route.

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": {
      "routeId": "<routeId>"
    },
    "name": "device_route_delete"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
routeIdYesThe route ID to delete.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

C2.9/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states 'Delete a device route' without mentioning permanence, side effects, permission requirements, or behavior when the route does not exist. For a destructive operation, this is a significant transparency gap.

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?

The description is a single direct sentence with no filler and front-loads the verb and resource. It is appropriately sized for a one-parameter tool, though it provides no extra structural context such as behavior or alternatives.

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?

For a destructive single-route delete with no output schema and no annotations, the description lacks critical context: permanence of deletion, whether bulk/range siblings should be considered, and expected result or error behavior. The simple schema helps, but the description does not fully equip an agent to use the tool safely and 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 documents the only parameter, routeId, as 'The route ID to delete,' providing 100% coverage. The description adds no additional meaning beyond that schema, so the baseline 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 uses a clear verb ('Delete') and resource ('device route'), so the core operation is obvious. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like device_route_bulk_delete or device_route_range_delete; the singular 'a device route' only implicitly suggests a single-route operation.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus the bulk or range delete variants. No prerequisites, conditions, or exclusions are mentioned, so an agent must infer usage purely from the tool name and schema.

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