Skip to main content
Glama

QRStuff MCP Server

Update QR code variant status

update_qrcode_variant_status
DestructiveIdempotent

Use this when the user wants to switch one Smart Rule variant on or off. Needs the variant ID.

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": {
      "idqrcode_variant": "<idqrcode_variant>",
      "status": "<status>"
    },
    "name": "update_qrcode_variant_status"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
statusYestrue to switch the variant on, false to switch it off.
idqrcode_variantYesVariant ID from `manage_qrcode_variants`. Never guess an ID.

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Added

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=true, so the agent knows this mutates state and is safe to retry. The description adds nothing beyond that — it doesn't say what turning a variant off does to existing traffic or whether the change is reversible, which matters given the destructive hint.

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 short sentences, the usage trigger front-loaded before the prerequisite. Nothing extraneous and nothing buried.

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?

An output schema exists and both parameters are fully documented, so the description needn't explain return values. For a simple two-parameter toggle it covers the essentials, with only the effect of the toggle left unstated.

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%: the schema itself explains status true/false and warns never to guess the ID. The description repeats only the ID requirement, adding no semantics beyond the structured field.

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?

The description names a specific verb and resource ('switch one Smart Rule variant on or off'), so the agent knows exactly what state change occurs. It doesn't explicitly contrast itself with manage_qrcode_variants or update_qr_code, but the status-toggle scope is unambiguous.

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?

'Use this when the user wants to switch one Smart Rule variant on or off' gives a clear triggering condition, and 'Needs the variant ID' states the prerequisite. No when-not guidance or named alternative is provided, which keeps it below 5.

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

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources