Skip to main content
Glama
chrischall

untappd-mcp

by chrischall
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

Check in a beer on Untappd

untappd_checkin

Post a new beer check-in to your public Untappd feed. Provide the beer ID, add rating, shout, venue, or photo, and confirm before publishing.

Instructions

Post a NEW beer check-in to YOUR Untappd account — this publishes to your public feed. Provide the beer id (bid) from untappd_search_beer; optionally a rating (0–5 in 0.25 steps), a shout (comment), a venue via foursquare_id, and a local photo via photo_path (JPEG/PNG). The preview shows the exact fields and photo that will be posted. 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
bidYesUntappd beer id to check in (from untappd_search_beer)
shoutNoOptional shout / comment text for the check-in
geolatNoOptional latitude of the check-in
geolngNoOptional longitude of the check-in
ratingNoRating 0–5 in 0.25 increments (omit for no rating)
timezoneNoThe drinker's IANA timezone (e.g. America/New_York), which sets the check-in's local time. Defaults to UNTAPPD_TIMEZONE, else the server's own zone — which on a hosted connector is usually UTC, so pass it when you know where the user is.
photo_pathNoOptional path to a local JPEG/PNG photo (max 15 MB) to attach — it is published publicly. Only use a file the user explicitly chose; the preview shows the resolved path and size for them to confirm.
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.
container_idNoOptional serving container id (e.g. 1 = draft, 2 = bottle, 3 = can)
foursquare_idNoOptional Foursquare venue id to tag the check-in location

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed3 schema fields changedv2.2.1
    • 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"
+}
    • changedInput schema / properties / photo_path / description
      Previous value: -"Optional path to a local JPEG/PNG photo (max 15 MB) to attach — it is published publicly. Only use a file the user explicitly chose; the dry run shows the resolved path and size for them to confirm."New value: +"Optional path to a local JPEG/PNG photo (max 15 MB) to attach — it is published publicly. Only use a file the user explicitly chose; the preview shows the resolved path and size for them to confirm."
  2. Changed2 schema fields changedv2.1.3
    • changedInput schema / properties / photo_path / description
      Previous value: -"Optional path to a local JPEG/PNG photo to attach to the check-in"New value: +"Optional path to a local JPEG/PNG photo (max 15 MB) to attach — it is published publicly. Only use a file the user explicitly chose; the dry run shows the resolved path and size for them to confirm."
    • addedInput schema / properties / timezone
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "The drinker's IANA timezone (e.g. America/New_York), which sets the check-in's local time. Defaults to UNTAPPD_TIMEZONE, else the server's own zone — which on a hosted connector is usually UTC, so pass it when you know where the user is.",
+  "minLength": 1,
+  "type": "string"
+}
  3. Changed1 schema field changedv2.0.0
    • changedInput schema / $schema
      Previous value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"New value: +"https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema"
  4. Changed1 schema field changedv1.0.0
    • addedInput schema / properties / photo_path
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Optional path to a local JPEG/PNG photo to attach to the check-in",
+  "type": "string"
+}
  5. First observedv0.0.0

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations only declare readOnlyHint=false, openWorldHint=true, idempotentHint=false, and destructiveHint=false — none disclose the non-obvious behaviors. The description adds substantial context: the post publishes to the public feed, a confirmation prompt is required where supported, and otherwise a two-step fallback returns a preview plus confirmToken that must be passed back exactly once. These privacy-relevant and workflow behaviors are disclosed well beyond the annotations, 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.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Four sentences covering the core action, key parameters, preview behavior, and the confirmation/confirmToken fallback. Dense but not bloated — the confirmation-flow explanation is essential for correct invocation and earns its place. Minor inefficiency: the parameter list could be trimmed since the schema already documents each field in detail.

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 10-parameter write tool with a two-step confirmation flow and no output schema, the description covers the essential return behavior — the phase-1 'confirmation-required' response returning a preview and confirmToken. It does not describe the final success response shape, but that is a minor gap given the two-phase flow is already explained and MCP_CONFIRM_MODE is referenced.

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

Parameters3/5

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

Schema coverage is 100%, and every parameter already has a detailed schema description (e.g., rating's 0.25-step constraint, timezone's defaulting chain, confirmToken's one-shot rule). The description reinforces key semantics like photo being published publicly and bid coming from untappd_search_beer, but the schema carries the interpretive weight, so the description adds marginal value over the structured definitions. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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: 'Post a NEW beer check-in to YOUR Untappd account — this publishes to your public feed.' It precisely scopes the action (new, on the user's own account, public) and the source of the key input (bid from untappd_search_beer), which distinguishes it from read-only siblings like untappd_checkin_info and destructive ones like untappd_delete_checkin.

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 gives clear context for use — creating a new check-in with a beer id sourced from untappd_search_beer — and details the confirmation workflow. However, it does not explicitly name or exclude sibling tools that operate on check-ins (untappd_checkin_info, untappd_delete_checkin, untappd_add_comment), leaving the when-not-to-use guidance implicit rather than stated.

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