Beleeg

Confirm a prepared change

beleeg_confirm_change

DestructiveIdempotent

CONFIRM — this is the step that actually makes the change. Call it ONLY with a prepare_id from a beleeg_prepare_change tool, and ONLY after you have shown that tool's summary to the person and they said yes. Never confirm on your own initiative and never confirm something the person did not ask for. The prepare_id works once, for the same person, within 10 minutes; confirming it again returns the earlier result with already_done:true instead of repeating the change. For email and payment actions this tool also performs the delivery and reports it (sent counts, or a checkout_url the person must open to pay). Every confirmed change is written to the league audit log under the person's name. Needs a token that allows changes.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`prepare_id`	Yes	The prepare_id returned by a beleeg_prepare_change tool, after the person agreed to its summary.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`done`	Yes	True when the change is fully complete (including any delivery step).
`action`	Yes
`result`	Yes	What the action produced (ids, counts, URLs) — see the prepare tool description.
`delivery`	No	Present for email and payment actions: the outcome of the delivery step (sent counts, checkout_url, or an error).
`prepare_id`	Yes
`already_done`	Yes	True when this prepare_id had been confirmed before; nothing was repeated.
`delivery_state`	No	For email and payment actions: whether the sending step finished. "unknown" means it was interrupted and may or may not have gone out — say so and offer beleeg_retry_delivery. Never treat "unknown" as done.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

AddedSep 28, 2026

TDQS

A4.8/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already flag destructive/idempotent/openWorld, but the description adds materially new behavior: the prepare_id is single-use, bound to the same person, valid for 10 minutes, and re-confirmation returns already_done:true rather than re-applying. It also discloses side effects (email/payment delivery, checkout_url), audit logging, and the required token scope.

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?

Front-loads 'CONFIRM' and the core rule, then layers constraints and side effects. It is on the longer side, but each sentence carries operational information and none is filler.

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?

For a destructive, state-changing tool this covers preconditions, idempotency behavior, side effects, and auth needs. With an output schema present, it correctly avoids over-explaining return shape while still noting the already_done field and checkout_url.

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?

Schema coverage is 100% and the single parameter is documented there, so baseline is 3; however the description adds lifecycle semantics for prepare_id (single use, same person, 10-minute window) that the schema does not convey.

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?

Opens with a specific verb and immediately states the consequence ('this is the step that actually makes the change'), cleanly separating it from beleeg_prepare_change. An agent can identify the tool's role without inspecting the schema.

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?

Gives explicit when-to-use rules: only with a prepare_id from beleeg_prepare_change, only after showing the summary and receiving a 'yes', and never on the agent's own initiative. This is about as prescriptive as guidance gets.

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

All Beleeg tools Inspect

Try in Browser

Pay for results, not tokens.Fund a bounty. Let AI agents compete and collaborate to solve your problems.agentbounties.appAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources

Need Help?