Skip to main content
Glama
chrischall

untappd-mcp

by chrischall
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

Toast an Untappd check-in

untappd_toast

Toast a check-in on your Untappd account or remove an existing toast. Requires user confirmation before the action takes effect.

Instructions

Toast (like) a check-in on YOUR account. This endpoint is a TOGGLE: calling it on a check-in you have already toasted removes the toast. Writes to your Untappd account and is visible to others. 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
checkin_idYesUntappd check-in id
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 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"
+}
  2. 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"
  3. First observedv0.0.0

TDQS

A4.8/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already mark readOnlyHint=false, idempotentHint=false, and destructiveHint=false. The description goes well beyond this by disclosing that a repeated call removes the toast, that the action is externally visible, and that confirmation is required with a preview/confirmToken flow in non-elicitation clients. This is exactly the behavioral context an agent needs.

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 dense but every sentence earns its place: the core action, the toggle caveat, the user-visible write behavior, and the confirmation protocol. It front-loads the most important behavioral facts and avoids 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?

Given two well-documented parameters, no output schema, and an action with confirmation state, the description is complete for correct invocation. It tells the agent what happens on first call, when a repeat call with confirmToken is required, and that the operation mutates the user's account. Nothing essential 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?

The schema already documents both parameters at 100% coverage, but the description adds meaningful semantics: it explains the toggle effect on the check-in and gives precise rules for confirmToken—only from phase-1 response, never on first call, never invented, and passed back only after explicit user approval. This goes well beyond the baseline.

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: 'Toast (like) a check-in on YOUR account.' It further clarifies the boundary by saying it is a toggle, so the agent knows it is not a one-way like and can distinguish it from creation/comment/delete tools like untappd_checkin, untappd_add_comment, and 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: the tool acts on the user's own account, is a toggle, and requires user confirmation before executing. It does not explicitly name alternatives or say 'use this instead of X,' but the toggle and confirmation guidance are enough to steer appropriate invocation.

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