Skip to main content
Glama
chrischall

alphaportal-mcp

by chrischall
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

alphaportal_edit_walk_radius

Destructive

Set a student's walk-zone radius in meters, with confirmation before changes proceed because the value can affect transportation eligibility.

Instructions

Set a student's walk-zone radius, in meters. This can affect transportation eligibility, so it asks the user to confirm first: a confirmation prompt where the client supports one; otherwise the first call returns a preview of the exact payload and a confirmToken, and only a repeat call with that token proceeds (see MCP_CONFIRM_MODE). Verified required fields: studentId, radius.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
studentIdYesThe numeric studentId.
confirmTokenNoONLY for the two-step confirmation fallback (a client without MCP elicitation). The confirmToken from this same tool's phase-1 "confirmation-required" response, passed back ONLY after the user has seen that preview and explicitly approved it in chat — never on the first call, never invented, never reused. Call again with the same arguments. Ignored when the client supports elicitation.
radiusMetersYesWalk-zone radius in meters (the API stores the base-unit distance).

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changedv1.1.0
    • removedInput schema / properties / confirm
      Removed value: -{
-  "description": "Must be true to proceed. Without this, the tool returns a preview.",
-  "type": "boolean"
-}
    • addedInput schema / properties / confirmToken
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "ONLY for the two-step confirmation fallback (a client without MCP elicitation). The confirmToken from this same tool's phase-1 \"confirmation-required\" response, passed back ONLY after the user has seen that preview and explicitly approved it in chat — never on the first call, never invented, never reused. Call again with the same arguments. Ignored when the client supports elicitation.",
+  "type": "string"
+}
  2. Changed1 schema field changedv0.4.0
    • changedInput schema / $schema
      Previous value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"New value: +"https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema"
  3. First observedv0.0.0

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already flag destructiveHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the base safety profile is known. The description goes further: it discloses the side effect on transportation eligibility, the mandatory confirmation path, that the first call returns a preview payload rather than mutating, and that only a repeat call with the token commits. This is exactly the extra context a write tool needs.

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?

Front-loads what the tool does, then immediately the confirmation consequence. Dense but every clause carries information; the only minor redundancy is restating the required fields already marked in the schema.

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?

There is no output schema, so the description must cover the interaction pattern, and it does: preview payload shape, token round-trip, and the elicitation alternative. It stops short of describing validation failures (e.g. negative radius) or success response shape, a small gap for a destructive write tool.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description still adds value by naming the verified required fields (studentId, radius) and by framing confirmToken's role in the call sequencing, reinforcing the token description's 'never on the first call, never reused' rule rather than merely repeating types.

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 verb and resource: 'Set a student's walk-zone radius, in meters.' That is unambiguous and clearly distinct from the read-oriented siblings (get_student, list_students, get_settings). An agent can identify the operation without opening the schema.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

Explains the confirmation gating precisely — elicitation prompt when supported, otherwise a two-phase preview + confirmToken flow — and names MCP_CONFIRM_MODE as the governing setting. It does not, however, say when this tool is preferable to alternatives or what prerequisites (permissions, student state) are needed.

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