Skip to main content
Glama

Onplana

by io.github.Onplana
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

update_notification_preferences

DestructiveIdempotent

Update the calling user's notification preferences. Pass only the fields you want to change; all others stay as-is. Useful when an agent is starting a noisy batch operation and wants to mute emails temporarily.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
riskEmailsNoThe weekly risk digest for projects the user owns or manages.
pushEnabledNoMaster switch for push notifications to the mobile apps. Separate from email: turning email off does not silence the phone, and vice versa.
taskOverdueNoNotify when a task goes overdue.
emailEnabledNoMaster switch for all email notifications. Overrides every per-type setting below, including the ones that are otherwise always sent.
taskAssignedNoNotify on task assignment.
weeklyDigestNoReceive weekly digest emails.
approvalEmailsNoEmails for approval requests and intake form submissions.
projectUpdatesNoNotify on project-level updates.
securityEmailsNoOccasional account-protection advice, such as turning on two-step sign-in.
workflowEmailsNoEmails when an automation or workflow run fails.
timesheetEmailsNoEmails for timesheet submissions, reviews, reminders, and the weekly compliance digest.
productUpdateEmailsNoThe monthly product-update email describing what changed in Onplana.
setupReminderEmailsNoMonthly reminders about workspace setup steps that are still open, sent to owners and admins until everything is decided.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed9 schema fields changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / approvalEmails
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Emails for approval requests and intake form submissions.",
+  "type": "boolean"
+}
    • changedInput schema / properties / emailEnabled / description
      Previous value: -"Master switch for all email notifications."New value: +"Master switch for all email notifications. Overrides every per-type setting below, including the ones that are otherwise always sent."
    • addedInput schema / properties / productUpdateEmails
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "The monthly product-update email describing what changed in Onplana.",
+  "type": "boolean"
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / pushEnabled
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Master switch for push notifications to the mobile apps. Separate from email: turning email off does not silence the phone, and vice versa.",
+  "type": "boolean"
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / riskEmails
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "The weekly risk digest for projects the user owns or manages.",
+  "type": "boolean"
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / securityEmails
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Occasional account-protection advice, such as turning on two-step sign-in.",
+  "type": "boolean"
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / setupReminderEmails
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Monthly reminders about workspace setup steps that are still open, sent to owners and admins until everything is decided.",
+  "type": "boolean"
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / timesheetEmails
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Emails for timesheet submissions, reviews, reminders, and the weekly compliance digest.",
+  "type": "boolean"
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / workflowEmails
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Emails when an automation or workflow run fails.",
+  "type": "boolean"
+}
  2. Added

TDQS

A4.1/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare the mutation profile (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=true, idempotentHint=true). The description adds real context beyond them: it is a partial patch ('pass only the fields you want to change; all others stay as-is') and it only ever touches the caller's own account. It stops short of explaining why the call is flagged destructive (muting notifications can suppress email).

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?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with the verb and scope, followed by the patch contract and the motivating use case. Every sentence carries distinct information and none is filler.

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 13-parameter, no-output-schema mutation, the description covers scope, patch semantics, and the primary use case, and the schema documents each toggle including the emailEnabled override. It does not touch on any rate limits or whether changes are reversible, but nothing essential to calling it correctly 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 description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3, and all 13 fields are individually documented in the schema. The description still adds non-schema semantics: unspecified fields are left unchanged, making this a patch rather than a full replacement, which is not derivable from the parameter list alone.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

Specific verb (update) plus resource (notification preferences), with the scope narrowed to 'the calling user's' preferences, which disambiguates it from tools that mutate other users. It does not name or contrast with the read sibling get_notification_preferences, so it falls just short of full sibling differentiation.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

Gives a concrete when-to-use scenario ('starting a noisy batch operation and wants to mute emails temporarily'), which tells an agent why it would reach for this tool. There is no when-not guidance or comparison against adjacent tools such as dismiss_notification or get_notification_preferences.

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

All Onplana toolsInspect
Try in Browser
Pay for results, not tokens.Fund a bounty. Let AI agents compete and collaborate to solve your problems.agentbounties.appAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources