Skip to main content
Glama

AroFlo: Create/Update Record

aroflo_create_or_update_record
Destructive

Create or update records in AroFlo by specifying zone and XML data to manage quotes, projects, and labor reporting.

Instructions

Create or update a record in AroFlo using zone + postxml.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
zoneYes
postxmlYes
extraNo
modeNo
verboseNo
debugNo
rawNo

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Implementation Reference

  • The handler function that executes the AroFlo 'aroflo_create_or_update_record' tool logic by calling the client.post method.
    async (args) => {
      const mode = resolveOutputMode(args);
      const envelopeRequested =
        typeof args.mode === 'string' || Boolean(args.raw) || Boolean(args.verbose);
      try {
        const response = await client.post(args.zone, args.postxml, { extra: args.extra });
        if (!envelopeRequested) {
          return successToolResult(response);
        }
        const out = buildMutationEnvelope({
          zone: args.zone,
          response,
          mode,
          debug:
            mode === 'debug' || mode === 'raw'
              ? {
                  zone: args.zone
                }
              : undefined
        });
        return successToolResult(out);
      } catch (error) {
        return errorToolResult(error, { mode, debug: { zone: args.zone } });
      }
    }
  • Registration of the 'aroflo_create_or_update_record' tool with the MCP server.
    export function registerMutateRecordTool(server: McpServer, client: AroFloClient): void {
      server.registerTool(
        'aroflo_create_or_update_record',
        {
          title: 'AroFlo: Create/Update Record',
          description: 'Create or update a record in AroFlo using zone + postxml.',
          inputSchema,
          // MCP SDK expects output schemas to be object schemas (or raw object shapes).
          // `z.any()` causes output validation to crash under the current SDK.
          outputSchema: z.object({}).passthrough(),
          annotations: {
            destructiveHint: true,
            openWorldHint: true
          }
        },
        async (args) => {
          const mode = resolveOutputMode(args);
          const envelopeRequested =
            typeof args.mode === 'string' || Boolean(args.raw) || Boolean(args.verbose);
          try {
            const response = await client.post(args.zone, args.postxml, { extra: args.extra });
            if (!envelopeRequested) {
              return successToolResult(response);
            }
            const out = buildMutationEnvelope({
              zone: args.zone,
              response,
              mode,
              debug:
                mode === 'debug' || mode === 'raw'
                  ? {
                      zone: args.zone
                    }
                  : undefined
            });
            return successToolResult(out);
          } catch (error) {
            return errorToolResult(error, { mode, debug: { zone: args.zone } });
          }
        }
      );
    }
  • Input schema definition for the 'aroflo_create_or_update_record' tool.
    const inputSchema = {
      zone: z.string().min(1),
      postxml: z.string().min(1),
      extra: z.record(z.string(), z.union([z.string(), z.number(), z.boolean()])).optional(),
      mode: z.enum(['data', 'verbose', 'debug', 'raw']).optional(),
      verbose: z.boolean().optional(),
      debug: z.boolean().optional(),
      raw: z.boolean().optional()
    };
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and openWorldHint=true. The description appropriately confirms the mutation nature ('Create or update') and adds implementation context ('using zone + postxml'), but omits critical behavioral details like idempotency, partial versus full updates, or failure modes given the complexity of XML-based writes.

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

Conciseness4/5

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

Single sentence with zero redundancy; every word conveys essential information. However, breverity crosses into underspecification given the tool's complexity (destructive operation with nested object parameters).

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

Completeness2/5

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

Grossly inadequate for a destructive, multi-mode operation with 7 parameters and nested objects. Fails to explain the XML payload structure, the 'zone' concept, or the purpose of output-modifying flags (mode, verbose, debug, raw) despite zero schema coverage.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters2/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema has 0% description coverage across 7 parameters. The description mentions only 'zone' and 'postxml' (2 of 7), leaving 'extra', 'mode', 'verbose', 'debug', and 'raw' completely undocumented. With zero schema coverage, the description fails to compensate for undocumented parameters.

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?

States specific verbs (Create/update) and resource (record) and distinguishes from sibling tools which are exclusively read operations (get_, list_, report_). The 'using zone + postxml' fragment clarifies the technical mechanism, though 'record' remains somewhat generic.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

Provides no guidance on when to use create versus update, prerequisites for operation, or when to prefer this over read-only alternatives. The description merely states functionality without contextual selection criteria.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/0x1NotMe/aroflo-mcp'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server