Skip to main content
Glama
cswkim

Discogs MCP Server

by cswkim

edit_item_in_wantlist

Update notes or ratings for a specific release in your Discogs wantlist to track preferences and details.

Instructions

Edit a release in a user's wantlist

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
usernameYes
release_idYes
notesNo
ratingNo

Implementation Reference

  • Defines and implements the 'edit_item_in_wantlist' MCP tool handler, which invokes the UserService to edit a wantlist item.
    export const editItemInWantlistTool: Tool<FastMCPSessionAuth, typeof UserWantlistItemParamsSchema> =
      {
        name: 'edit_item_in_wantlist',
        description: `Edit a release in a user's wantlist`,
        parameters: UserWantlistItemParamsSchema,
        execute: async (args) => {
          try {
            const userService = new UserService();
            const wantlistItem = await userService.wants.editItem(args);
    
            return JSON.stringify(wantlistItem);
          } catch (error) {
            throw formatDiscogsError(error);
          }
        },
      };
  • Zod schema defining the input parameters for editing an item in a user's wantlist, including username, release ID, notes, and rating.
    export const UserWantlistItemParamsSchema = UsernameInputSchema.merge(
      ReleaseIdParamSchema.extend({
        notes: z.string().optional(),
        rating: z.number().int().min(0).max(5).optional(),
      }),
    );
  • Registers the 'edit_item_in_wantlist' tool (and related wantlist tools) with the FastMCP server.
    export function registerUserWantlistTools(server: FastMCP): void {
      server.addTool(getUserWantlistTool);
      server.addTool(addToWantlistTool);
      server.addTool(editItemInWantlistTool);
      server.addTool(deleteItemInWantlistTool);
    }
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states 'Edit a release in a user's wantlist', implying a mutation operation, but doesn't disclose permissions needed, whether changes are reversible, rate limits, or what the response looks like. This is inadequate for a mutation tool with zero annotation coverage.

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 a single, efficient sentence with no wasted words, making it appropriately sized and front-loaded. Every word contributes directly to stating the tool's purpose.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness2/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given a mutation tool with 4 parameters, 0% schema coverage, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It lacks details on usage context, parameter meanings, behavioral traits, and expected outcomes, making it insufficient for effective agent use.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters2/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate by explaining parameters. It mentions 'a release in a user's wantlist', hinting at 'release_id' and 'username', but doesn't cover 'notes' or 'rating' parameters or provide any semantic details beyond what's inferred. This fails to compensate for the low coverage.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the action ('Edit') and resource ('a release in a user's wantlist'), providing a specific verb+resource combination. However, it doesn't distinguish this tool from its sibling 'edit_user_collection_custom_field_value' or 'edit_release_rating', which also involve editing user-related data, so it misses full sibling differentiation.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'add_to_wantlist' or 'delete_item_in_wantlist', nor does it mention prerequisites or context for editing a wantlist item. It lacks explicit when/when-not instructions or named alternatives.

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/cswkim/discogs-mcp-server'

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