Skip to main content
Glama
chrischall

honeybook-mcp

by chrischall
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

use_flow_link

Capture a HoneyBook questionnaire flow credential from an open /flow/ link via the fetchproxy browser extension, enabling access to that specific questionnaire.

Instructions

Capture a HoneyBook QUESTIONNAIRE (flow) credential via the fetchproxy browser extension. Use this for a link shaped https://.hbportal.co/flow/?hash=… — for a client-portal link (/app/link/resolve/…) use use_magic_link instead. Prerequisites: install the fetchproxy extension, open the questionnaire link in that browser and let the page render, then run this tool. It snapshots localStorage["HONEYBOOK_REACT_WEAK_AUTH_"] into ~/.honeybook-mcp/flows.json. A flow credential is HoneyBook's 'weak auth': it is scoped to that ONE questionnaire and cannot read portal workspaces, files, invoices or payment methods. Because the storage key contains the flow id, the extension asks you to re-approve the scope once per new questionnaire.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
flow_link_urlYesQuestionnaire link, e.g. https://<vendor>.hbportal.co/flow/<flowId>?hash=…&userId=… Only the /flow/<flowId> segment is required: the credential is read out of the open page's localStorage, so the rewritten step URL (/flow/<flowId>/1-Questions) works too. The URL's ?hash= is used only as a fallback when the page stored none, so prefer the original email link if the capture reports no hash.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv1.0.0
    • changedInput schema / $schema
      Previous value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"New value: +"https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema"
  2. Addedv0.9.0

TDQS

A5/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations only provide readOnlyHint=false, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the tool snapshots localStorage into a file, explains the credential's scope limitations (cannot read portal workspaces, files, etc.), and mentions the re-approval requirement per flow. This is rich, accurate behavioral context with no contradiction.

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?

A single, well-organized paragraph front-loads purpose and usage, then covers prerequisites, behavior, and limitations. Every sentence adds new information without redundancy or filler.

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 one-parameter tool with no output schema, the description covers all essential context: when to use, prerequisites, exact behavior, storage location, scope limits, and parameter guidance. Nothing an agent needs to decide or execute is missing.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters5/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100% but the description adds significant nuance: it clarifies that only the /flow/<flowId> segment is required, that the rewritten step URL works, and explains the fallback use of ?hash=. This goes well beyond the schema's basic format hint.

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 opens with a specific verb ('Capture') and resource ('HoneyBook QUESTIONNAIRE (flow) credential'), and immediately distinguishes from a sibling tool (`use_magic_link`). The link shape is explicitly defined, making the tool's purpose unmistakable.

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?

It states exactly when to use this tool (for /flow/ links) and when not (for /app/link/resolve/ links), naming the alternative tool. It also lists prerequisites (install extension, open link, let render) and a clear workflow.

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