Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

PatrolTech

by online.patroltech
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Propose editing a guard

patroltech_patrollers_propose_rename

Use when you want to change the name or phone of a guard. It only adds a proposal to the pending batch of this connection (up to 10 changes); nothing changes in the account yet. Show the returned summaries to the user and call patroltech_proposals_confirm only after they agree.

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": {
      "guard": "<guard>"
    },
    "name": "patroltech_patrollers_propose_rename"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameNoNew name. Omit it if it does not change.
guardYesCurrent name of the guard.
phoneNoNew phone number of the guard. Omit it if it does not change.
organizationNoOmit unless the account has more than one organization; then the exact name (or id) as listed by patroltech_account_get_context.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Goes well beyond the annotations: tells the agent nothing is committed yet, that the change is queued in a per-connection pending batch capped at 10 changes, and that user confirmation must precede patroltech_proposals_confirm. This is exactly the non-obvious stateful behavior an agent needs and that readOnlyHint=false/destructiveHint=false alone would not convey.

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 tight sentences, each doing distinct work: trigger condition, side-effect scope, and required follow-up. The usage trigger is front-loaded.

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?

Covers the mutation workflow, the pending-batch model, and the confirmation handoff even though there is no output schema. Minor gap: it states the batch holds up to 10 changes but not what happens when that limit is reached (error vs. eviction), which an agent would want to know before being surprised by a failure.

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%, so all four parameters (guard, name, phone, organization) are already documented, including the omit-if-unchanged semantics. The description confirms which fields are editable but adds no format or syntax detail beyond the schema, so baseline 3 applies.

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 action (propose a change to a guard's name or phone) and clarifies that the tool name's 'rename' also covers phone changes. An agent can readily distinguish this from patroltech_proposals_confirm and patroltech_proposals_cancel, which form the surrounding workflow.

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?

Explicit 'Use when you want to change the name or phone of a guard', plus the required follow-up sequence: show the returned summaries to the user, then call patroltech_proposals_confirm only after they agree. The alternative/complementary tool and the condition for invoking it are spelled out.

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

All PatrolTech toolsInspect
Try in Browser
One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources