Skip to main content
Glama
chrischall

vibo-mcp

by chrischall
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

vibo_update_section

Edit a timeline section's name, time, note, or description after the user approves the change.

Instructions

Edit a timeline section's name, time, note, or description. Subject to the section's host-edit permissions. 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
nameNo
noteNonote to the DJ for this section
timeNoscheduled time, e.g. "05:00 pm"
eventIdYes
sectionIdYes
descriptionNo
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 changedv2.3.1
    • 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. Addedv1.5.1
  4. Removedv1.4.3
  5. First observedv1.3.1

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations only indicate readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false, which are minimal. The description adds crucial behavioral context: the confirmation requirement, the two-step fallback with a preview and confirmToken, and the dependency on client elicitation support. This goes well beyond the annotations and is essential for correct invocation.

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 two sentences with no redundancy. The first sentence states purpose and permission, the second explains the confirmation flow. Information is front-loaded, and every clause serves a purpose without extraneous 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 7-parameter mutation tool with no output schema, the description covers the most critical aspect—the confirmation mechanism—and explains the return behavior in the fallback case (preview and confirmToken). It also mentions permission constraints. It lacks details on success responses or error conditions, but given the complexity and the confirmation emphasis, it is sufficiently complete for an agent to call correctly.

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 only 43%, so the description should compensate. It lists the fields (name, time, note, description) but does not define them beyond what the schema already provides for note and time. However, it gives detailed semantics for confirmToken, explaining its purpose, usage, and restrictions, which is valuable. The lack of elaboration on name and description keeps this at a 3.

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 clearly states the tool edits a timeline section's name, time, note, or description, using the specific verb 'Edit' and the resource 'timeline section'. It distinguishes from sibling tools like vibo_update_song by its focus on sections, and the listed fields make its scope unambiguous.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives, though the name and field list make it obvious for section editing. It mentions a permission constraint ('Subject to the section's host-edit permissions') but provides no exclusions or direct comparisons to sibling tools, leaving the decision to the agent's inference.

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