Lemonvite

Update guests

lemonvite_update_guests

Destructive

Use this when the user wants to fix saved guests on a Lemonvite invitation: a name, email or phone number. Send up to 50 in one call; only the fields you pass change, and an empty string clears one. Get each invitation_id from lemonvite_list_guests. Changing contact details does not re-send the invitation, but on a published invitation, adding an email or phone to a guest who had none sends the invitation there. Adding a phone to a guest who had none requires host_confirms_sms_consent=true. On a published invitation a new phone can exceed the phone allowance and return payment_required: explain the credits it uses and the larger allowance, and retry with authorized_credits only after the host agrees. If the account is short of credits: Buy the creditsToBuy shortfall with lemonvite_start_checkout without event_id. Each guest gets its own result, so one failure does not stop the others. To add new guests use lemonvite_add_guests; to take someone off the list use lemonvite_remove_guests.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`guests`	Yes	Batch of 1–50 guest updates. Each needs an invitation_id and the fields to change. Omitted fields retain their saved values.
`event_id`	Yes	Lemonvite event_id returned by lemonvite_create_invitation or lemonvite_list_invitations. Identifies the event to act on; not a guest invitation_id or RSVP URL.
`authorized_credits`	No	Maximum shared account credits the host explicitly agreed to spend across this entire request. Default 0: return payment_required without spending. Explain the credits used and the increased phone allowance, and obtain confirmation before setting this.
`host_confirms_sms_consent`	No	Set true only when the host confirms the guest agreed to receive SMS about this event. Required when adding a phone number to a guest who had none.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`failed`	Yes
`results`	Yes
`updated`	Yes
`credits_used`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedSep 25, 2026

changedInput schema / properties / authorized_credits / description

Previous value: -"Maximum shared account credits the host explicitly agreed to spend across this entire request. Default 0: return payment_required without spending. Explain the cost and increased phone allowance and obtain confirmation before setting this."New value: +"Maximum shared account credits the host explicitly agreed to spend across this entire request. Default 0: return payment_required without spending. Explain the credits used and the increased phone allowance, and obtain confirmation before setting this."

Changed4 schema fields changedSep 21, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / authorized_credits

Added value: +{
+  "default": 0,
+  "description": "Maximum shared account credits the host explicitly agreed to spend across this entire request. Default 0: return payment_required without spending. Explain the cost and increased phone allowance and obtain confirmation before setting this.",
+  "maximum": 100,
+  "minimum": 0,
+  "type": "integer"
+}

addedOutput schema / properties / credits_used
```
Added value: +{
+  "type": "number"
+}
```

addedOutput schema / properties / results / items / properties / payment_required

Added value: +{
+  "additionalProperties": false,
+  "properties": {
+    "creditsToBuy": {
+      "type": "number"
+    },
+    "maxInvitations": {
+      "type": "number"
+    },
+    "maxPhoneInvitations": {
+      "type": "number"
+    },
+    "requiredCredits": {
+      "type": "number"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "requiredCredits",
+    "creditsToBuy",
+    "maxPhoneInvitations",
+    "maxInvitations"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}

changedOutput schema / required

Previous value: -[
-  "updated",
-  "failed",
-  "results"
-]New value: +[
+  "updated",
+  "failed",
+  "credits_used",
+  "results"
+]

Changed7 schema fields changedSep 10, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / event_id / description

Added value: +"Lemonvite event_id returned by lemonvite_create_invitation or lemonvite_list_invitations. Identifies the event to act on; not a guest invitation_id or RSVP URL."

addedInput schema / properties / guests / description

Added value: +"Batch of 1–50 guest updates. Each needs an invitation_id and the fields to change. Omitted fields retain their saved values."

addedInput schema / properties / guests / items / properties / email / description

Added value: +"Guest email address, e.g. alex@example.com, up to 320 characters. Omit on update to keep it; an empty string clears it."

addedInput schema / properties / guests / items / properties / invitation_id / description

Added value: +"Guest invitation_id returned by lemonvite_list_guests for this event; not the event_id."

addedInput schema / properties / guests / items / properties / name / description

Added value: +"Guest display name, up to 200 characters. Omit on update to keep the saved name; an empty string clears it."

addedInput schema / properties / guests / items / properties / phone / description

Added value: +"Guest phone number, up to 32 characters; E.164 preferred, e.g. +15551234567. Omit to keep it; an empty string clears it."

changedInput schema / properties / host_confirms_sms_consent / description

Previous value: -"Required when an update ADDS a phone number to a guest who had none"New value: +"Set true only when the host confirms the guest agreed to receive SMS about this event. Required when adding a phone number to a guest who had none."

First observedSep 9, 2026

TDQS

A4.8/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations declare destructiveHint=true and readOnly=false, and the description earns its keep with non-obvious behavior: partial-update semantics (only passed fields change, empty string clears), per-guest independent results so one failure doesn't stop the batch, invitation re-send rules on published invitations, the SMS-consent requirement, and the credits/payment_required path.

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 opening is front-loaded with the trigger and the batch/partial-update rules before the more specialized payment and consent conditions. It is dense and long-ish, but nearly every sentence carries operationally necessary information; the credit-retry sentence is the only slightly heavy passage.

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?

A mutation tool with an output schema, so return values need not be described. All decision-relevant behavior (identity source, batch limits, consent and credit gates, sibling routing) is present; nothing an agent needs to invoke it correctly is missing.

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 already 100%, so the structured fields carry the parameter detail; the description rises above baseline by tying parameters to workflow (authorized_credits is only set after the host agrees, host_confirms_sms_consent is required when adding a phone to a guest who had none) and by mapping invitation_id back to lemonvite_list_guests.

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 ('fix saved guests on a Lemonvite invitation') and enumerates the mutable fields (name, email, phone). It explicitly distinguishes itself from the add and remove siblings in the final sentence, so an agent can route without opening any 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 triggers, names alternatives ('To add new guests use lemonvite_add_guests; to take someone off the list use lemonvite_remove_guests'), and covers edge-case routing such as the payment_required flow and the lemonvite_start_checkout fallback for a credit shortfall.

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

All Lemonvite 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?