Skip to main content
Glama
clidey

whodb-cli

Official

whodb_confirm

Destructive

Executes a pending write operation after user approval. Use the token from a previous query to confirm and run the write.

Instructions

Confirm and execute a pending write operation.

Best for: Executing write queries after user approval in confirm-writes mode. Not recommended for: Read queries (they execute immediately without confirmation). Common mistakes: Using an expired token (tokens expire after 5 minutes); not explaining the query to the user before confirming.

Usage Example:

{
  "name": "whodb_confirm",
  "arguments": {
    "token": "550e8400-e29b-41d4-a716-446655440000"
  }
}

Workflow:

  1. Call whodb_query with a write operation (INSERT, UPDATE, DELETE, etc.)

  2. Receive confirmation_required=true, a confirmation_token, and confirmation_expiry

  3. Explain to the user what the query will do in plain language

  4. After user approves, call whodb_confirm with the token

  5. Query executes and returns results

Token behavior: Tokens are valid for 5 minutes (expiry time is in the response). If confirmation fails due to a connection error or timeout, you can retry with the same token — it is only consumed after successful execution. Use whodb_pending to list active tokens if you lose track.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
tokenYesConfirmation token from a previous whodb_query or hosted platform write response

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
rowsYes
errorNo
columnsYes
messageNo
commandsNo
next_stepsNo
request_idNo
column_typesNo
setup_statusNo
Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the destructiveHint=true annotation, the description adds critical behavioral details: token expiry (5 minutes), retry behavior on connection errors, and that the token is consumed only after successful execution. It also explains the confirmation flow step by step, enhancing transparency.

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?

The description is well-structured with clear sections (best for, workflow, token behavior) and front-loaded with the main purpose. However, the workflow steps are somewhat redundant with the best-for section, slightly increasing length. Overall, it is effective but could be trimmed slightly.

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 a simple tool with one parameter and an output schema, the description covers all essential aspects: workflow, token lifecycle, error handling, and references to sibling tools. An agent can confidently use this tool without additional context.

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?

With 100% schema coverage, the schema already documents the token parameter. The description adds substantial meaning: it clarifies the token source (from whodb_query or hosted platform), explains token behavior (expiry, retry), and provides a usage example, making the parameter fully understandable.

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 specifies the tool's function: 'Confirm and execute a pending write operation.' It uses the specific verb 'confirm' and resource 'pending write operation,' distinguishing it from siblings like whodb_query (which initiates confirmation) and whodb_pending (which lists tokens).

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?

The description provides explicit guidance: 'Best for: Executing write queries after user approval in confirm-writes mode' and 'Not recommended for: Read queries (they execute immediately without confirmation).' It also outlines a detailed workflow and common mistakes, leaving no ambiguity about when to use this tool.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/clidey/whodb'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server