fynk MCP

by com.fynk.app

Overview Discussions Admin

Update account team

update-account-team

DestructiveIdempotent

Update an existing team's name and/or icon.

Use this tool when:

The user asks to rename a team
The user asks to change a team's icon

team_uuid is required. Send only the fields that should change.

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": {
      "team_uuid": "<team_uuid>"
    },
    "name": "update-account-team"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`icon`	No	New icon identifier
`name`	No	New display name for the team
`team_uuid`	Yes	UUID of the team to update

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description
`icon`	No	Icon identifier for the team (e.g. "UserGroupIcon")
`name`	No	Name of the team
`uuid`	No	Identifier for the team. Do not show to the user unless they ask for it
`_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

A4/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, idempotentHint=true, openWorldHint=false, and destructiveHint=true. The description adds useful partial-update semantics and required-parameter guidance, but it does not explain why the operation is marked destructive or what existing values are overwritten, leaving a notable gap against the annotation.

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?

The purpose is front-loaded in one sentence, followed by concise usage bullets and a short parameter note. Every sentence contributes directly to correct invocation.

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?

The tool has an output schema, full schema description coverage, and clear annotations, so most context is already covered. The description is sufficient for a simple three-parameter mutation, though it could better address the destructiveHint=true implication and overwrite behavior.

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 the schema already documents team_uuid, name, and icon, including the icon enum. The description reinforces that team_uuid is required and that only changed fields should be sent, but adds no further semantic detail beyond the schema.

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 and resource ('Update an existing team') plus the exact mutable fields ('name and/or icon'). An agent can distinguish it from siblings such as create-account-team, delete-account-team, and update-account-tag without opening 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 Guidelines4/5

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

It gives explicit triggering conditions: the user asks to rename a team or change its icon. It also explains the partial-update convention ('Send only the fields that should change'). It does not name sibling alternatives or exclusions, which keeps it from 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?