Skip to main content
Glama
chrischall

pickuppatrol-mcp

by chrischall
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

pup_set_plan

Change a student's dismissal for one or more dates, or clear them back to the weekly default. Review the preview, confirm, and the updated plan is applied.

Instructions

Change how a student is dismissed on one or more specific dates, or clear those dates back to the student's weekly default. This changes how a child actually leaves school. 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). The preview shows the exact payload. Read pup_list_transportations first — options differ in whether they require a note, a car number or an early-dismissal time.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
noteNoNote for the school; required by some options
datesYesOne or more YYYY-MM-DD dates to apply this plan to
car_numberNoCar number, for options where usesCarNumbers is true
student_idYesStudent id, from pup_list_students
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.
transportation_idYesDismissal option id from pup_list_transportations, or null to clear these dates back to the student's default plan
early_dismissal_timeNoHH:MM, required when the option is an early dismissal

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 changedv1.0.0
    • changedInput schema / $schema
      Previous value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"New value: +"https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema"
  3. First observedv0.1.2

TDQS

A4.7/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden, and it delivers: it warns that this changes how a child actually leaves school, discloses the required user confirmation, and explains the preview-and-confirmToken behavior in clients without elicitation support. This is exactly the behavioral context an agent needs before calling a stateful mutating tool.

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 front-loaded with the core action, then covers confirmation behavior and prerequisites. Each sentence earns its place; there is no filler or restating of schema content.

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 a 7-parameter tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is unusually complete: it explains side effects, confirmation modes, the confirmToken contract, the preview, and the prerequisite lookup. Nothing essential for correct invocation is missing.

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 coverage is 100% and the schema already documents conditional requirements for note, car_number, and early_dismissal_time. The description adds the meta-guidance that those requirements vary by dismissal option and that the transportation list must be consulted, which is a small but genuine increment over the schema.

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 and resource: changing how a student is dismissed on one or more specific dates, plus the clearing behavior back to the student's weekly default. This makes the tool's scope unambiguous and sets it apart from the default-plan tool in its sibling list.

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?

It gives a clear prerequisite ('Read pup_list_transportations first') and explains the confirmation workflow and the two-step fallback with confirmToken. It does not explicitly name alternative tools or say when not to use this one, but 'weekly default' plus 'specific dates' implies the boundary.

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