Skip to main content
Glama

Adjust Item Properties

horizon_adjust_item
DestructiveIdempotent

Apply atomic property deltas to an owned inventory item using an exact reviewed revision; requires the player session, instance UUID, and current revision to prevent conflicts.

Instructions

Adjusts Item Properties using the reviewed inventory revision. Use when: the player explicitly requests this inventory action. Not for: automatic retries, client grants, changing instance IDs or revisions to force an uncertain action through. Requires: userId and the player's session: sign in with horizon_signin_email or horizon_signin_anonymous and pass its accessToken as sessionToken. An exact reviewed inventory revision and instance UUID. Side effects: Applies all configured deltas atomically. Archived templates and properties without a rule cannot be adjusted. One HTTP attempt only. Returns: Complete {userId,revision,instances,limits,serverTime} inventory. Replace only the matching host/project/player cache. Instances carry server-generated UUIDs, properties, equipped and createdAt. Errors: 409 REVISION_CONFLICT or an uncertain response: use horizon_get_items and reconcile intent, never silently substitute a new revision and repeat. 404 ITEM_NOT_FOUND means this instance no longer exists. 422 ITEM_PROPERTY_NOT_ALLOWED/ITEM_PROPERTY_LIMIT_REACHED rejects the entire adjustment. 401 means the session is missing or expired: sign in again and retry with the new accessToken. 403 for a session means the token belongs to another user: pass the userId that signed in. Needs HORIZON_API_KEY. Every failure returns an error result (isError) with the HTTP status and body: a 401 that horizon_test_connection also returns means HORIZON_API_KEY is wrong, 429 means the account's per-minute rate limit was reached (wait a minute, then retry).

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
userIdYesSigned-in player UUID matching the session
changesYesUp to eight distinct nonzero deltas; current server rules and final 256-byte size still apply
instanceIdYesExact owned item instance UUID from the reviewed inventory
sessionTokenYesPlayer accessToken sent only as Authorization Bearer
expectedRevisionYesExact reviewed revision; never refresh and substitute automatically

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv1.9.1

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Goes well past the annotations: atomic delta application, archived templates and rule-less properties being unadjustable, a single HTTP attempt only, cache replacement scoped to the matching host/project/player, and a full error taxonomy (409/404/422/401/403/429) with required remediation for each. This is exactly the behavioral context a destructive mutation needs on top of destructiveHint/idempotentHint.

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?

Labeled sections (Use when / Not for / Requires / Side effects / Returns / Errors) make it scannable and the purpose is front-loaded. The error enumeration is long and slightly repetitive (401 and 429 are explained in two places), which is the only real waste.

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

Completeness5/5

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

For a destructive, revision-guarded mutation with no output schema, it covers everything an agent needs: auth chain, atomicity, return shape ({userId,revision,instances,limits,serverTime}), cache handling, and failure semantics. Nothing material 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 coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3, but the description earns more by explaining what the parameters mean operationally: expectedRevision is the exact reviewed revision that must not be silently substituted, sessionToken is the accessToken from sign-in, and changes are deltas subject to server rules and archived-template restrictions. It does not document the per-key format or the 8-item cap, but the schema already carries those.

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 a specific verb and resource ('Adjusts Item Properties') plus the scoping constraint that it operates against a reviewed inventory revision, which separates it from catalogue/equip/discard siblings by implication. It never names an adjacent sibling (e.g. horizon_equip_item, horizon_discard_item) explicitly, so the differentiation is inferred rather than stated.

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?

Gives an explicit 'Use when' trigger (player explicitly requests this inventory action), an explicit 'Not for' exclusion list (automatic retries, client grants, forcing IDs/revisions), and names the concrete alternative path on conflict: horizon_get_items plus reconciliation. It also names the prerequisite sign-in tools (horizon_signin_email / horizon_signin_anonymous) and how to feed their accessToken in.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools