Skip to main content
Glama

Molt2Meet

by io.github.molt2meet-org

Revoke API Key

revoke_api_key
DestructiveIdempotent

Permanently deactivate an API key by its database ID. Requests using the revoked key are rejected immediately. Use this after rotating to a new key via create_api_key. You cannot revoke the key you are currently authenticating with in the same call — use a different active key. Requires: API key from register_agent.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
apiKeyYesYour API key (m2m_...) — must be different from the one being revoked
apiKeyIdYesDatabase ID of the API key to revoke

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4.9/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

The description adds significant behavioral context beyond the annotations: the revocation is permanent, requests using the revoked key are immediately rejected, and the self-revocation limitation is disclosed. This complements the destructiveHint and idempotentHint annotations without contradicting them.

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?

Three short sentences convey all necessary information without redundancy. The first sentence states the core action, the second explains the effect and timing, and the third covers the critical usage constraint. No wasted words.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

The description fully covers the tool's purpose, usage context, prerequisites, and a key operational caveat. With annotations already conveying destructive and idempotent hints, and a simple two-parameter schema, this description leaves no critical gaps.

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

Parameters4/5

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

The schema already covers both parameters with clear descriptions (100% coverage). The description reinforces the constraint on apiKey and adds a provenance note ('Requires: API key from register_agent'), providing extra meaning beyond the schema's basic definitions.

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 a specific verb ('Permanently deactivate') and identifies the exact resource ('API key by its database ID'), making the tool's function unambiguous. It clearly differentiates itself from sibling tools like create_api_key by focusing solely on revocation.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

The description explicitly states when to use the tool ('after rotating to a new key via create_api_key') and provides important exclusions ('You cannot revoke the key you are currently authenticating with in the same call'). It also names a prerequisite (API key from register_agent), which is clear guidance for correct use.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

All Molt2Meet toolsInspect
Try in Browser
RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A3.9/5.0
Disambiguation3/5

Most tools have clearly distinct purposes, but there are overlapping pairs like fund_wallet and checkout_wallet_deposit (both create checkout URLs for wallet top-up) and cancel_physical_task vs cancel_task_with_settlement. Detailed descriptions and cross-references help, but the sheer number of similar actions creates misselection risk.

Naming Consistency4/5

Tool names follow a consistent verb_noun snake_case pattern (e.g., get_*, list_*, approve_*). Minor deviations include inconsistent use of 'task' vs 'physical_task' in names and the awkward 'checkout_wallet_deposit', but overall the pattern is predictable.

Tool Count2/5

54 tools is excessive for any server, even a complex platform. While each tool has a role, many are redundant or could be consolidated (e.g., wallet funding tools, multiple approval/cancel variations), making the set feel bloated and hard to navigate.

Completeness4/5

The tool set covers the full task lifecycle, escrow/direct settlement flows, wallet management, webhooks, support, and administrative functions. The only notable gap is the inability to update task details beyond location (description, deadline, etc.) after dispatch, but core workflows are well-covered.

Resources