Skip to main content
Glama
chrischall

untappd-mcp

by chrischall
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

Toast an Untappd check-in

untappd_toast
Destructive

Toggle a toast on an Untappd check-in for your account. Confirm first because it writes publicly and removes an existing toast if called again.

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

A4.4/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Goes well beyond the annotations by disclosing the non-obvious toggle semantics (which explains the idempotentHint=false), that the write is public/visible to others (destructiveHint=true), and the exact confirmation protocol including the MCP_CONFIRM_MODE fallback. This is exactly the behavioral context an agent needs before mutating a user's social account.

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?

Front-loads the core purpose and toggle behavior, then the side effects, then the confirmation flow. It is dense and slightly parenthetical-heavy, but every sentence carries functional information rather than 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?

With no output schema in play, the description steps in to describe the two-phase return behavior (preview plus confirmToken) that an agent must understand to drive the fallback flow. Combined with the write-visibility disclosure, nothing critical for correct invocation is missing.

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 description coverage is 100%, and both checkin_id and confirmToken are already fully documented in the schema, including the confirmToken's usage rules. The description's pointer to MCP_CONFIRM_MODE adds marginal context but no parameter detail the schema lacks, so the baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb+resource (toast a check-in) and scopes it to the user's own account, immediately distinguishing it from read-oriented siblings like untappd_checkin_info or untappd_activity_feed. The toggle nature is called out explicitly, so the agent knows the operation's semantics without opening the schema.

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?

Explains when the call performs a write versus an un-toast, and details the required confirmation path (elicitation or two-step confirmToken), which is essential usage guidance. It does not name an alternative sibling or state when not to use this tool, so it falls short of a 5.

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