fynk MCP

by com.fynk.app

Overview Discussions Admin

Create account tag

create-account-tag

Create a new tag in the current account.

Use this tool when:

The user asks to create a new tag
You need a new tag to be available before attaching it to documents or templates

name (max 40 chars) and color (hex like "#FF0000") are required.

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": {
      "name": "<name>",
      "color": "<color>"
    },
    "name": "create-account-tag"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`name`	Yes	Display name for the new tag (max 40 characters)
`color`	Yes	Hex color code for the tag (e.g. "#FF0000")

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description
`name`	No	Name of the tag
`uuid`	No	Identifier for the tag. Do not show to the user unless they ask for it
`color`	No	Hex color code for the tag (e.g. "#FF0000")
`_entity_type`	No	Only relevant for tooling. Do not show to the user

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedOct 20, 2026

TDQS

A3.9/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, idempotentHint=false, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=false, and an output schema exists. The description adds only the 'current account' scoping and a use-case note; it does not say what happens on a duplicate tag name (relevant given non-idempotency) or what is returned.

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?

Short, front-loaded, and structured with bullets so the purpose and trigger conditions read first. Slight redundancy in restating parameter constraints already in the schema keeps it from a 5.

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?

With annotations, a full schema, and an output schema, the description covers what an agent needs to decide and call correctly. The main remaining gap is duplicate-name behavior, which matters for a non-idempotent create.

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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so both parameters are already documented with the same constraints. The description repeats 'max 40 chars' and the hex example rather than adding new meaning (e.g., normalization rules for color, case handling for names). 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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Create a new tag') plus scope ('in the current account'). Among siblings like create-account-document-type, create-account-metadata, and create-account-team, 'tag' is unambiguous, and the title reinforces it.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

Explicit 'Use this tool when' bullets give two concrete conditions, including the prerequisite framing of creating a tag before attaching it to documents or templates. It does not name alternatives (e.g., update-account-tag, list-account-tags) or say when not to use it, so it stops short of a 5.

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

All fynk MCP tools Inspect

Try in Browser

One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources

Need Help?