Skip to main content
Glama

Sweeppea MCP

by com.sweeppea.mcp

update_sweepstakes

Idempotent

Update an existing sweepstakes. Use fetch_sweepstakes first to get the sweepstakes_token. UPDATABLE FIELDS: Only these fields can be modified: sweepstakes_name, start_date, end_date, start_time, end_time. NOT UPDATABLE: handler, sweepstakes_type, prize value/description, calendar settings, sync options, and any other field NOT listed above cannot be changed after creation. Do NOT tell the user they can update fields that are not supported by this endpoint. If they ask to change something not updatable, explain it cannot be modified after creation. PRIZE CHANGES: the prize is set in the Official Rules wizard at creation and is NOT editable via any MCP tool. Do NOT work around this by editing entry page display text — direct the user to Sweeppea support instead.

update_sweepstakes

When to use

Update an existing sweepstakes. Use fetch_sweepstakes first to get the sweepstakes_token. UPDATABLE FIELDS: Only these fields can be modified: sweepstakes_name, start_date, end_date, start_time, end_time. NOT UPDATABLE: handler, sweepstakes_type, prize value/description, calendar settings, sync options, and any other field NOT listed above cannot be changed after creation. Do NOT tell the user they can update fields that are not supported by this endpoint. If they ask to change something not updatable, explain it cannot be modified after creation. PRIZE CHANGES: the prize is set in the Official Rules wizard at creation and is NOT editable via any MCP tool. Do NOT work around this by editing entry page display text — direct the user to Sweeppea support instead.

Pre-calls required

  1. fetch_sweepstakes if the user gave you a sweepstakes name instead of a token

Parameters to validate before calling

  • sweepstakes_token (string, required) — The unique token (UUID) of the sweepstakes to update

  • sweepstakes_name (string, optional) — New name for the sweepstakes (max 200 characters)

  • start_date (string, optional) — New start date in YYYY-MM-DD format (must be today or future)

  • end_date (string, optional) — New end date in YYYY-MM-DD format (cannot precede start_date)

  • start_time (string, optional) — New start time in HH:MM format 24-hour

  • end_time (string, optional) — New end time in HH:MM format 24-hour

Notes

  • Only sweepstakes_name, start_date, end_date, start_time, end_time are updatable

  • Handler, type, and prize are permanent after creation — prize changes go through Sweeppea support, never via display text edits

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
end_dateNoNew end date in YYYY-MM-DD format (cannot precede start_date)
end_timeNoNew end time in HH:MM format 24-hour
start_dateNoNew start date in YYYY-MM-DD format (must be today or future)
start_timeNoNew start time in HH:MM format 24-hour
sweepstakes_nameNoNew name for the sweepstakes (max 200 characters)
sweepstakes_tokenYesThe unique token (UUID) of the sweepstakes to update

TDQS

A4.7/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

The description goes beyond the annotations by specifying the exact fields that can be modified and those that are permanent, such as prize and handler. It also warns against workarounds via display text edits and directs to support for prize changes, adding meaningful context beyond the readOnlyHint/idempotentHint flags.

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 description is well-structured with headings and bullet points, but it repeats the same content twice (first paragraph and then under 'When to use'). This redundancy makes it longer than necessary and earns points off for conciseness.

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?

The description is complete for this mutation tool: it specifies prerequisites (fetch_sweepstakes), validation rules for parameters, permanent-field limitations, and how to handle unsupported changes. Given the lack of an output schema, it fully covers what the agent needs to know to use the tool correctly.

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?

The schema descriptions cover all parameters well, so the baseline is high. The description adds critical context by clearly stating that only the listed fields are updatable, which prevents the agent from attempting to modify parameters not in that set. However, most parameter details are duplicated from the schema, so it doesn't add much beyond that key constraint.

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's function with a specific verb and resource: 'Update an existing sweepstakes.' It further distinguishes itself from siblings like create_sweepstakes or delete_sweepstakes by detailing exactly which fields are updatable and which are not, making the tool's scope unambiguous.

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?

Explicit guidance is provided: use fetch_sweepstakes first to obtain the token, and only use this tool for the listed updatable fields. It also explains what to do if a user requests a non-updatable change (redirect to support), thus clarifying when not to use this tool and how to handle out-of-scope requests.

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

All Sweeppea MCP toolsInspect
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

A3.6/5.0
Disambiguation4/5

Most tools follow a clear resource+action pattern (fetch_* for lists, get_* for single items, create/update/delete for writes), making them distinguishable. A few near-overlaps exist (fetch_billing_transactions vs fetch_wallet_transactions, draw_winners vs schedule_drawing) but the descriptions clarify the boundaries.

Naming Consistency4/5

Tool names consistently use snake_case verb_noun, with fetch_ for list operations and get_ for single-item retrieval. Some verb variation (add_participant, count_participants, draw_winners, schedule_drawing) deviates from the dominant create/fetch/update/delete pattern but remains predictable and readable.

Tool Count1/5

With 83 tools, this is far beyond a well-scoped server (typically 3-15, with 25+ considered too many). Even though the platform has broad functionality, the sheer number of tools creates significant agent confusion and selection overhead.

Completeness4/5

The sweepstakes domain is thoroughly covered: lifecycle management, participants, groups, rules, drawings, winners, calendar, notes, todos, tickets, surveys, invoices, billing, files, and entry settings. A few minor gaps exist (e.g., no general participant field update, no archive action) but the surface is remarkably complete for its scope.

Resources