Skip to main content
Glama

edit_question

Modify existing prediction questions on Fatebook by updating titles, resolution dates, or notes to keep forecasts accurate and organized.

Instructions

Edit a Fatebook question

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
questionIdYes
apiKeyNo
titleNo
resolveByNo
notesNo

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Implementation Reference

  • Handler function for the 'edit_question' MCP tool. Decorated with @mcp.tool() for automatic registration. Makes a PATCH request to the Fatebook API to update question title, resolveBy date, or notes.
    @mcp.tool()
    async def edit_question(
        questionId: str,
        apiKey: str = "",
        title: str = "",
        resolveBy: str = "",
        notes: str = "",
    ) -> bool:
        """Edit a Fatebook question"""
    
        api_key = apiKey or os.getenv("FATEBOOK_API_KEY")
        if not api_key:
            raise ValueError(
                "API key is required (provide as parameter or set FATEBOOK_API_KEY environment variable)"
            )
    
        data = {"questionId": questionId, "apiKey": api_key}
    
        # Add optional parameters only if provided
        if title:
            data["title"] = title
        if resolveBy:
            data["resolveBy"] = resolveBy
        if notes:
            data["notes"] = notes
    
        try:
            async with httpx.AsyncClient() as client:
                response = await client.patch("https://fatebook.io/api/v0/editQuestion", json=data)
                response.raise_for_status()
                return True
    
        except httpx.HTTPError:
            raise
        except Exception:
            raise
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. 'Edit' implies a mutation operation, but the description doesn't disclose any behavioral traits such as required permissions, whether edits are reversible, rate limits, or what the output looks like. This leaves significant gaps in understanding how the tool behaves beyond its basic function.

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?

The description is extremely concise with a single sentence, 'Edit a Fatebook question', which is front-loaded and wastes no words. While it may be under-specified, it earns full marks for brevity and clarity within its limited scope.

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?

Given the complexity (a mutation tool with 5 parameters, 0% schema coverage, no annotations, but with an output schema), the description is incomplete. It doesn't address key aspects like parameter meanings, behavioral context, or usage guidelines. The presence of an output schema reduces the need to explain return values, but other gaps remain significant for effective tool selection and invocation.

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?

The input schema has 5 parameters with 0% description coverage, so the schema provides no semantic information. The description adds no meaning beyond the tool name—it doesn't explain what 'questionId', 'title', 'resolveBy', or 'notes' represent or how they affect the edit. For a tool with multiple parameters and no schema descriptions, this is inadequate compensation.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose3/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description 'Edit a Fatebook question' clearly states the verb ('Edit') and resource ('Fatebook question'), making the basic purpose understandable. However, it doesn't differentiate from sibling tools like 'create_question' or 'delete_question' beyond the obvious verb difference, nor does it specify what aspects can be edited. This makes it vague about the scope of editing.

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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention prerequisites (e.g., needing an existing question), exclusions, or comparisons to siblings like 'create_question' for new questions or 'delete_question' for removal. Without such context, users must infer usage from the tool name alone.

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/an1lam/fatebook-mcp'

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