Skip to main content
Glama
chrischall

untappd-mcp

by chrischall
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

Sync a user's check-ins into the cache

untappd_sync_checkins

Fetch and cache a user's Untappd check-ins incrementally, resuming from last progress until complete. Pass force_backfill to re-sync from scratch while keeping cached data.

Instructions

Fetch a user's detailed check-ins (venue, date, comment) into the cache from user/checkins. Incremental and resumable: pages backwards up to max_pages per call, persisting progress every page; run again until another_run_needed is false. NOTE: Untappd only returns the ~50 most recent check-ins for accounts other than your own and will not page further — such a sync reports history_truncated and you should use untappd_sync_user_beers for full has-had coverage. backfill_complete is only reported once ~all of total_checkins is cached. Pass force_backfill: true to reset a cache wrongly marked complete and re-page the whole history (cached rows are kept). Omit username for your own account.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
usernameNoUntappd username. Omit to use your own configured account (UNTAPPD_USERNAME).
max_pagesNoPages (50 check-ins each) to fetch this run (default 10). Keep modest to respect the ~100 calls/hour rate limit.
force_backfillNoReset the sync state (clear backfill_complete + cursors) but KEEP cached rows, then re-page the whole history from newest. Use to recover a cache wrongly marked complete.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. 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"
  2. Addedv1.7.1

TDQS

A5/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations only give generic hints (readOnlyHint false, openWorldHint true). The description discloses side effects: writes to cache, persists progress per page, reports history_truncated and backfill_complete flags, respects a ~100 calls/hour rate limit, and force_backfill resets state while keeping rows. This is far beyond what annotations offer and contradicts nothing.

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 well-structured: main action first, then incremental behavior, then the critical API limitation and alternative, then force_backfill. Every sentence carries unique value—no filler or repetition of schema text. It is concise for the complexity it covers.

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?

With no output schema, the description explains the key return flags (another_run_needed, history_truncated, backfill_complete) and edge cases (third-party account limit, force_backfill recovery). It covers prerequisites, failure modes, and the retry loop, making it fully self-sufficient for an agent to invoke correctly.

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 covers all three parameters with descriptions, but the description adds actionable context: max_pages is tied to the rate limit, force_backfill resets sync state but keeps cached rows, and username omission defaults to the configured account. These enrich the schema without redundancy.

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 states a specific action ('Fetch a user's detailed check-ins into the cache'), identifies the source endpoint (user/checkins), and distinguishes itself from untappd_sync_user_beers by noting when the sibling is needed for full coverage. This clearly separates it from the 40+ sibling tools.

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 provides explicit when-to-use instructions: incremental/resumable behavior, run repeatedly until another_run_needed is false, and a direct exclusion ('use untappd_sync_user_beers for full has-had coverage') when Untappd's 50-check-in limit applies. It also explains force_backfill's recovery use case.

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