Skip to main content
Glama
@proof-holdings/mcp-server

@proof-holdings/mcp-server

Official

update_sub_account

Destructive

Update a sub-account by profile ID, including display info, email branding, custom links, theme, and verification display settings.

Instructions

Update a sub-account by ID. Supports changing display info, email branding (theme, support email), theme, custom links, and verification display settings.

ACCESS: needs a Proof account. Set PROOF_API_KEY and restart this server, then call this tool again. start_login does NOT open this tool.

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": {
      "profile_id": "<profile_id>"
    },
    "name": "update_sub_account"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
bioNoProfile bio
themeNoProfile theme settings
is_publicNoWhether the profile is publicly visible
avatar_urlNoAvatar (base64 or URL, null to remove)
is_primaryNoSet as primary profile
profile_idYesProfile ID
email_themeNoTheme of this sub-account's emails
is_businessNoWhether this is a business profile
custom_linksNoCustom links (max 20)
display_nameNoDisplay name
business_nameNoBusiness name
support_emailNoSupport email this sub-account's messages show (null to remove)
show_delegationsNoList the published, in-force delegations for the domains the profile shows (default true)
show_proof_channelsNoShow proof channels on the Public page
show_verification_datesNoShow verification dates on the Public page

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYesMongoDB ObjectId
bioNo
themeYesProfile theme customization
usernameNoAbsent until a username is claimed
is_publicYes
avatar_urlNoA URL or a data URI; null once cleared
created_atYes
is_primaryYes
profile_idYesThe public id used in profile URLs
updated_atYes
view_countYes
email_themeYesTheme of this sub-account's emails; null when unset (read as `dark`).
is_businessYes
name_reviewYesWhy a typed name is left out of the public reads: it reads as a protected brand's own, until a domain of that brand is checked. Null when nothing is held.
proof_orderYesWho decided the order of a profile's proofs. `default`: domain, social account, Telegram bot, email, phone, wallet, then each proof's `display_order`. `owner`: the owner's `display_order` alone — send it when the owner reorders. The first shown proof that is not hidden leads the profile's preview card, share tags and badge. Omitted on an update, the profile keeps its current setting.
custom_linksYes
display_nameNo
business_nameNo
name_headlineYesWhy a published name may not lead the page (it carries a protected brand word); it leads only when an OV/EV certificate names it. Null when not demoted.
public_proofsYesThe shown proofs, in the order the public profile shows them
support_emailYesSupport address shown in this sub-account's messages; null when unset.
show_delegationsYes
channels_completeYesThe owner's statement that the channels listed are all of theirs.
verification_levelYesAlways 'basic'; no levels are computed; removed in the next major.
show_proof_channelsYes
username_is_defaultNoThe username was given automatically (from the domain the profile shows, else its short id); the owner may replace it once with a name of their choice.
show_verification_datesYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv1.10.0

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=true, so the safety profile is known; the description adds the non-obvious auth/setup requirement and the start_login exclusion, which an agent could not infer from structured fields. What it omits is mutation semantics: whether omitted fields stay unchanged or get reset, and whether custom_links replaces the whole list. For a destructive update that gap matters, but the added access context is genuine value.

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?

Two short blocks: purpose plus affected field families first, then the access precondition. The purpose sentence is front-loaded and the access note is actionable rather than filler. Slight redundancy between "email branding (theme, support email)" and the separate mention of "theme" costs it a point.

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?

For a 15-parameter destructive mutation with nested objects, the definition covers identity, scope of change, and access requirements, and an output schema exists so return values need no explanation. The remaining hole is sibling differentiation and partial-update semantics, which are the two things an agent most needs before calling a destructive update.

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% across all 15 parameters, including nested theme and custom_links objects, so the schema carries the semantic load. The description groups the fields into functional buckets (branding, theme, links, verification display), which adds light orientation but no syntax or constraint detail beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 states a specific verb and resource ("Update a sub-account by ID") and enumerates the changeable areas: display info, email branding, theme, custom links, verification display settings. That is far more than a restatement of the name. It stops short of distinguishing this from siblings such as update_profile or update_my_profile, which an agent could easily confuse with it.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

It gives a real prerequisite: a Proof account, PROOF_API_KEY set plus a server restart, and an explicit exclusion that start_login does NOT unlock this tool. That is useful when-to-use guidance. However, there is no routing guidance against sibling update tools (update_profile, update_public_page) and no note on how this relates to set_primary_sub_account despite the overlapping is_primary parameter.

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