Skip to main content
Glama
chrischall

myhotlunchbox-mcp

by chrischall
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

mhlb_update_student

Update a student's lunch account profile by submitting an edited student form. Fetch the current form first to avoid losing omitted fields; confirm the preview before changes are applied.

Instructions

Update a student profile. Call mhlb_get_student_form first and send that model back with your edits — the endpoint replaces the whole record, so omitted fields are lost. 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). NOTE: this write is UNVERIFIED — its request shape was derived from the web app’s compiled API client but has not been exercised against a live account. Inspect the confirmation preview before approving it.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
studentYesThe student model, as returned by mhlb_get_student_form / mhlb_new_student_form, with your edits applied.
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 changedv1.2.1
    • 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 changedv1.0.0
    • changedInput schema / $schema
      Previous value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"New value: +"https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema"
  3. First observedv0.2.0

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Goes far beyond the sparse annotations (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false) by disclosing that the endpoint replaces the whole record so omitted fields are lost, that user confirmation is mandatory, and that the request shape is UNVERIFIED against a live account. The 'Inspect the confirmation preview before approving it' caution adds actionable risk guidance the annotations cannot convey.

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?

Four sentences, each earning its place: the one-line purpose, the round-trip workflow, the two-mode confirmation mechanics, and the unverified-status warning. The confirmation sentence is dense and the UNVERIFIED note runs slightly long, but there is no redundancy with the schema or annotations.

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 mutation tool with a nested object parameter, a two-step confirmation fallback, and no output schema, the description covers preconditions, destructive replacement semantics, the confirmation protocol, and the unverified risk. The main gap is the absence of any description of the success or error response shape beyond the confirmToken mention, which the schema only partly offsets.

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?

With 100% schema description coverage the baseline is 3, and the description earns the extra point by explaining the reasoning behind the student parameter: the whole-record replacement means the caller must send the full model back or silently lose omitted fields, which motivates the get_form-then-edit round trip. It also reinforces the confirmToken's restricted lifecycle by summarizing when the token is and is not legitimate.

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?

Opens with the specific verb-resource pair 'Update a student profile' and immediately disambiguates the semantics with 'the endpoint replaces the whole record.' The workflow reference to mhlb_get_student_form clearly separates editing an existing student from the sibling create/new-student tools without requiring schema inspection.

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?

Gives an explicit precondition and workflow — 'Call mhlb_get_student_form first and send that model back with your edits' — and precisely describes how the confirmation flow behaves in both elicitation-capable clients and the fallback token path. It stops short of naming when-not-to-use alternatives such as mhlb_create_student or mhlb_delete_student, so exclusions are left to inference.

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