Skip to main content
Glama
chrischall

crowntowncompost-mcp

by chrischall
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Hybrid

Report a missed pickup

crowntown_report_missed_pickup
Destructive

Report a missed compost pickup by specifying the date, with optional notes, to alert staff for resolution.

Instructions

Report that a scheduled collection was missed. This notifies Crown Town Compost staff. Asks the user to confirm first: a confirmation prompt where the client supports one; otherwise the first call returns a preview and a confirmToken, and only a repeat call with that token proceeds (see MCP_CONFIRM_MODE).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
dateYesThe date of the missed pickup: YYYY-MM-DD, or as shown on your service calendar (e.g. "Jul 24, 2026").
commentNoOptional note with details for the staff.
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.

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 changedv1.0.3
    • changedInput schema / properties / date / description
      Previous value: -"The date of the missed pickup (as shown on your service calendar, e.g. \"Jul 24, 2026\")."New value: +"The date of the missed pickup: YYYY-MM-DD, or as shown on your service calendar (e.g. \"Jul 24, 2026\")."
  3. Changed1 schema field changedv0.6.0
    • changedInput schema / $schema
      Previous value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"New value: +"https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema"
  4. First observedv0.2.0

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

The annotations already indicate destructiveHint=true, readOnlyHint=false, and openWorldHint=true. The description significantly adds behavioral context by detailing the confirmation mechanism: it forces a user confirmation, and in the fallback mode, it requires a two-step process with a confirmToken. It also clarifies that the tool notifies staff and asks for confirmation first, which aligns with the destructive hint and adds depth. There is no contradiction; the description complements the annotations by explaining the exact confirmation flow.

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?

The description is compact and front-loaded with the core purpose in the first sentence, immediately followed by the confirmation mechanism. It avoids redundancy and focuses on essential behavioral details. However, the mention of MCP_CONFIRM_MODE assumes the agent knows this external concept, which might not be universally understood; a slightly more explicit explanation could be helpful, but it is not overlong. Overall, it is concise and structured effectively.

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?

Given the tool's moderate complexity (two-step confirmation, potential side effects) and the absence of an output schema, the description provides comprehensive guidance: it explains the action, the confirmation requirements, the parameter usage, and the fallback mechanism. It covers edge cases like clients without elicitation support and clarifies the confirmToken's lifecycle. An agent has all necessary context to invoke the tool correctly without additional information.

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 parameters are already well-documented. The description additionally emphasizes the confirmToken parameter's critical usage rules: only in fallback mode, never on first call, never invented, and must be passed back from the phase-1 response. This adds crucial semantic meaning beyond schema definitions, especially for an AI agent that must handle the two-step flow correctly. It doesn't elaborate on 'date' or 'comment' beyond what's in the schema, but the coverage is sufficient.

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?

The description clearly states the tool's action ('Report that a scheduled collection was missed') and identifies the resource (Crown Town Compost staff). It includes critical details about the confirmation flow, distinguishing it from other tools like 'crowntown_skip_service' which might be confused for reporting issues. The explicit mention of the two-step confirmation process clarifies a unique behavioral aspect, ensuring an agent understands what this tool does beyond its name.

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?

The description implicitly indicates when to use this tool: when a scheduled collection was missed. It contrasts with the sibling 'crowntown_skip_service' by emphasizing 'missed pickup' rather than a planned skip. However, it does not explicitly state when NOT to use this tool (e.g., for scheduling changes). It also references MCP_CONFIRM_MODE, which is an external contextual signal, but does not fully explain alternatives for staff contact beyond 'contact_support', leaving some room for ambiguity.

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