Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Dropyour

by io.dropyour
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Rotate a drop's management token

dropyour_rotate_token
Destructive

Mint a NEW management token for a drop and kill the old one — the self-serve way out of a lost or leaked token. With the old token it goes through at once; with your connected account (recovery), a human confirms it: with a connected account this answers confirmation_required with an address; the owner opens it, sees exactly what you asked and confirms (passkey or email); then call again with the SAME arguments within 5 minutes. Works with the old token (rotation) or with your connected account for a drop you own (recovery: you lost the token, your account gets you a fresh one). The new token is returned ONCE, right here — store it. Every previously shared management link dies the moment this returns: that is the point when rotating a leaked token, and the cost to know when rotating a merely misplaced one.

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": {
      "dropId": "<dropId>"
    },
    "name": "dropyour_rotate_token"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
dropIdYes
managementTokenNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Added

TDQS

A4.7/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations only declare destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=false; the description goes far beyond by naming exactly what is destroyed ('every previously shared management link dies the moment this returns'), that the new token is shown only once, and that the connected-account path requires human confirmation via passkey or email within a five-minute window. This is precisely the context an agent needs before calling a destructive, non-idempotent 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 destructive outcome and the confirmation flow are correctly front-loaded, but the two-credential model is explained twice — once in the opening sentence and again in the parenthetical '(rotation) or ... (recovery: you lost the token, your account gets you a fresh one)'. That restatement and the dual 'that is the point ... and the cost' clause add length without new information.

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?

With no output schema, the description still covers return behavior: the new token is returned once at call time and the confirmation_required response carries an address for the owner. For a two-parameter destructive tool, nothing an agent needs in order to invoke it or handle its response 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 0% and managementToken has no schema description, but the description explains its role implicitly: providing it triggers immediate rotation, omitting it triggers the account-recovery confirmation flow. dropId's format is left to the schema pattern, and the mapping of 'the old token' to the managementToken field must be inferred rather than stated by name.

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 — 'Mint a NEW management token for a drop and kill the old one' — which no sibling tool covers. An agent can immediately distinguish this from dropyour_secret_set or dropyour_update_settings without opening a 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 conditions for both invocation paths: supply the old token for immediate rotation, or omit it and use a connected account for recovery of a lost token. It also states the required re-invocation behavior ('call again with the SAME arguments within 5 minutes'), so there is no ambiguity about what to do after confirmation_required.

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

All Dropyour toolsInspect
Try in Browser
Claude Code, inside the Godot 4 editorFlockbay puts an AI agent in the real Godot 4 editor: it writes GDScript, runs your game and fixes what breaks. Free, or bring your own Claude Code or Codex.flockbay.comAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources