Loyal Digicard

Create a draft program

create_program

Creates a stamp-card program as a DRAFT. Customers can’t see or use it until the owner reviews and publishes it in the Loyal Digicard app (review_url). The Free plan includes 3 programs (drafts count). Without branch_ids it runs at every active branch.

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>",
      "reward": "<reward>",
      "stamps_to_reward": "<stamps_to_reward>"
    },
    "name": "create_program"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`name`	Yes	Program name, for example “Buy 5 coffees, get 1 free”
`terms`	No	Short terms shown on the card
`reward`	Yes	The reward, for example “Free coffee”
`branch_ids`	No	From list_branches; default: all active branches
`cashier_chooses`	No	The cashier picks 1…max stamps per visit, starting at default
`stamps_per_visit`	No	Fixed stamps per visit (default 1). Leave out when the cashier chooses.
`stamps_to_reward`	Yes	Stamps needed for the reward (2–30)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedNov 10, 2026

TDQS

A4.3/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the annotations (which only state readOnly=false, destructive=false, idempotent=false), the description discloses the draft lifecycle, the fact that customers cannot see or use it until publishing via review_url, the Free plan quota of 3 with drafts counting, and the branch scoping default. These are exactly the non-obvious behaviors an agent needs before writing.

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?

Four short sentences, front-loaded with the creation scope and the draft state, then quota and branch behavior. Nearly every sentence carries weight, though the trailing branch_ids sentence largely duplicates what the schema already says.

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?

For a 7-parameter creation tool with a nested object and no output schema, the description covers lifecycle, quota, and scoping well, and the parenthetical review_url hints at a returned value. It leaves out what identifier or payload is returned and any failure behavior at quota limits, which keeps it from a 5.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents every parameter including branch_ids' default of all active branches. The description restates that branch default, which is mild reinforcement but adds no new syntax or constraint detail (e.g., the cashier_chooses vs stamps_per_visit exclusivity is only in the schema). 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 ("Creates a stamp-card program") plus the resulting state ("as a DRAFT"), which distinguishes it from update_program and list_programs without needing the schema. An agent immediately knows this is a creation operation producing a non-live entity.

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?

Gives clear context for use: the program is created as a draft, remains invisible until the owner publishes it, and drafts consume the Free plan's 3-program allowance. It does not explicitly say when to prefer update_program over a fresh create, or what happens when the quota is exhausted, so it stops short of full when/when-not guidance.

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

All Loyal Digicard 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?