Nas.com MCP

Update Business Application Config

update_community_application_config

Update application form fields for a managed community. Business and community refer to the same thing and are interchangeable. Before offering this action or requesting its inputs, check business permissions. FREE businesses cannot use this tool, regardless of individual feature rows. Call check_business_tool_access before collecting inputs. Show any grace-period warning and verified resubscribe link before continuing, and never proceed when access is blocked.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`communityId`	Yes
`applicationConfigDataFields`	Yes

TDQS

A3.8/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations are all false, so description must disclose behavior. It warns about permissions and business type restrictions but does not describe side effects, whether the update is additive or replaces fields, or if the operation is reversible. Some behavioral context is present but not fully transparent.

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 description is four sentences, covering purpose, terminology clarification, and usage conditions. It is relatively concise but could be more structured with bullet points or clearer separation of guidelines.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness2/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given no output schema and no parameter descriptions, the description lacks completeness. It does not describe the input format for applicationConfigDataFields, the return value, or how the update interacts with existing fields. The strong usage guidelines partially compensate but leave significant gaps.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters2/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0%, but the description does not explain the purpose or format of the two parameters. 'communityId' is inferable, but 'applicationConfigDataFields' (array of objects) is vague with no additionalProperties constraints explained. The description adds no parameter-specific meaning.

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 clearly states the tool updates application form fields for a managed community. It clarifies that 'business' and 'community' are interchangeable, resolving ambiguity from the title. This distinguishes it from sibling get_community_application_config.

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?

The description provides explicit usage guidance: check business permissions, FREE businesses cannot use this tool, call check_business_tool_access before collecting inputs, show grace-period warning and resubscribe link, and never proceed when access is blocked. It references a specific sibling tool.

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

All Nas.com MCP tools Inspect

Try in Browser

RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

B3/5.0

Disambiguation2/5

Many tools are semantically identical, distinguished only by 'business' vs 'community' prefixes, and descriptions explicitly state they are interchangeable. This creates ambiguity for agent selection. Examples include add_business_admins/add_community_admins and get_business/get_community.

Naming Consistency3/5

Tools generally follow a verb_noun pattern, but the inconsistent use of 'business' vs 'community' for the same entities breaks the pattern. While individual naming is clear, the overall set lacks uniformity.

Tool Count1/5

With 423 tools, the server is massively over-scoped. The high count is driven by redundant 'business' and 'community' variants and many niche operations. A more focused surface would be far more manageable.

Completeness4/5

The tool set covers a broad range of features including CRUD operations for multiple product types, analytics, payments, messaging, and integrations. Minor gaps exist (e.g., missing update for some entity types), but overall domain coverage is strong.

Resources

Need Help?