FavCRM

This connector has been deprecated

This connector has been replaced by https://glama.ai/mcp/connectors/io.favcrm/favcrm/admin

update_service_package

Idempotent

Update an existing service package. Pass only the fields you want to change.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`name`	No	Name
`price`	No	Decimal string, e.g. "80.00"
`status`	No	Status filter
`packageId`	Yes	Service package ID to update
`validDays`	No	Validity period in days
`description`	No	Description
`sessionCount`	No	Number of sessions in the package
`applicableType`	No	What this package applies to: services \| products \| both
`applicableItems`	No	Item IDs the package can be redeemed against

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`data`	Yes	Tool result payload — shape varies per tool, see the tool description
`summary`	Yes	One-line human-readable summary of the action
`renderType`	Yes	UI rendering hint for the result

TDQS

A4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already provide idempotentHint=true and destructiveHint=false. The description adds the specific behavioral trait of partial update (only pass fields to change), which is valuable beyond annotations.

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

Conciseness5/5

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

Two sentences, no unnecessary words. Front-loaded with verb and resource, second sentence explains usage. Highly efficient.

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?

Given the 9 parameters, 100% schema coverage, and presence of output schema, the description adequately covers the core action. Could mention return value but not required.

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 coverage is 100% with descriptions for all 9 parameters, so baseline is 3. The description adds no per-parameter information beyond what's in the schema.

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 action 'Update an existing service package' and the partial update behavior 'Pass only the fields you want to change.' It unambiguously distinguishes this tool from create, delete, list, and get siblings.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description mentions partial update but does not explicitly compare with create or other update tools like restore_service_package. It lacks guidance on when not to use this tool or when alternatives are better.

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

All FavCRM 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

A3.6/5.0

Disambiguation5/5

Each tool targets a distinct resource and action, with clear descriptions that minimize ambiguity. Even related tools like create_post vs create_post_type are well-separated by their targets.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tools follow a consistent verb_noun pattern (e.g., create_account, list_services, update_post), with no mixing of naming conventions. The pattern is predictable throughout the set.

Tool Count1/5

190 tools is excessively large for any server, far exceeding the typical 3-15 tool range. The sheer volume overwhelms agents and suggests poor scoping, even for a comprehensive CRM platform.

Completeness4/5

The tool set covers CRUD operations across many domains (CRM, bookings, marketing, CMS, etc.), but notable gaps exist (e.g., no delete_account, delete_contact, update_booking). These are minor given the vast surface.

Resources

Need Help?