Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Nas.com

by com.nas
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Update Business Application Config

update_business_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.

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": {
      "communityId": "<communityId>",
      "applicationConfigDataFields": "<applicationConfigDataFields>"
    },
    "name": "update_business_application_config"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
communityIdYesNas.com business (community) ID. Use an ID returned by list_businesses or another Nas.com tool; never invent one.
applicationConfigDataFieldsYesQuestions to ask applicants.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / applicationConfigDataFields / description
      Added value: +"Questions to ask applicants."
    • addedInput schema / properties / communityId / description
      Added value: +"Nas.com business (community) ID. Use an ID returned by list_businesses or another Nas.com tool; never invent one."
  2. First observed

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Goes well beyond the annotations (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, openWorldHint=false) by disclosing tier gating, a mandatory access-check step, grace-period warnings, and resubscribe-link handling. It stops short of describing what happens to existing fields that are not included in the update array, which matters for a config-replacement mutation.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The purpose is front-loaded, but the access-check instruction is stated twice ('check business permissions' then 'Call check_business_tool_access before collecting inputs'), and the UI-behavior sentences about grace-period warnings and resubscribe links are dense workflow prose layered onto a tool definition.

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 two-parameter mutation with full schema coverage and no output schema, the description covers the critical gating and preconditions an agent needs. The main remaining gap is update semantics (full replacement vs. partial merge of the fields array) and what a successful response confirms.

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 both communityId and applicationConfigDataFields are already documented, including the warning not to invent IDs. The description adds no further meaning about the array's structure or whether it replaces or merges existing fields, so the baseline of 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: 'Update application form fields for a managed community.' It also resolves the business/community naming ambiguity, which is exactly the distinction an agent needs to choose between this tool and its near-twin siblings such as update_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?

Explicitly states preconditions and exclusions: FREE businesses cannot use the tool regardless of feature rows, check_business_tool_access must be called before collecting inputs, and the agent must never proceed when access is blocked. That is a clear when-not-to-use rule plus the alternative workflow to run first.

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

All Nas.com toolsInspect
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