Skip to main content
Glama

rsnc_agent_update_perk

Update a perk collection's configuration. Can adjust pricing, supply, and active status.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
brandIdYesThe brand identifier (wallet address). Used for permission and scope checks.
isActiveNoEnable or disable the perk.
maxSupplyNoNew total supply.
descriptionNoNew description text.
collectionIdYesThe perk collection ID to update.
priceInPointsNoNew RSNC cost to redeem.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations, the description must fully disclose behavior. It mentions adjustable fields but omits side effects, permission requirements, reversibility, and what happens to unspecified fields. This is a significant gap for a mutation tool.

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?

Single sentence, front-loaded with the verb 'Update', and no redundant information. Every phrase earns its place.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Description covers the core purpose and adjustable fields, but lacks behavioral context such as permissions or side effects. With no output schema and no annotations, this leaves the agent with unanswered questions about consequences of updating.

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%, so parameters are fully documented. The description adds no meaning beyond the schema; it merely paraphrases some fields (pricing, supply, active status). Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 updates a perk collection's configuration and explicitly lists adjustable aspects (pricing, supply, active status), distinguishing it from create_perk and update_event.

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?

The description provides clear context for when to use (updating existing perk configuration), but does not explicitly exclude alternatives or mention create_perk for new perks. Slight gap but still clear.

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.

TDQS

B3.3/5.0
Disambiguation2/5

Several tools have overlapping purposes, e.g., rsnc_agent_best_deals, rsnc_agent_route_purchase, and rsnc_agent_compare_cashback all help find the best purchase/reward option. Similarly, rsnc_agent_network_info, rsnc_agent_network_stats, and rsnc_agent_network_analytics provide similar network overview data with unclear boundaries.

Naming Consistency3/5

All tools share the consistent 'rsnc_agent_' prefix, but the remainder mixes verb-first patterns (browse_perks, claim_reward, create_event) with noun-first patterns (brand_analytics, network_flows, perk_intelligence). This inconsistency makes the tool surface less predictable than a uniform verb_noun scheme.

Tool Count2/5

With 45 tools, the server feels over-scoped for a rewards network. While the domain is broad, many tools are highly granular analytics variations, and the count exceeds the 25+ threshold, adding cognitive load and diminishing coherence.

Completeness4/5

The tool set covers the core lifecycle: brand discovery, onboarding, event/perk creation and updates, reward processing, user balance/stats, and redemption. Minor gaps exist, such as no delete operations for events/perks and no direct user listing, but agents can work around these.

Resources