Skip to main content
Glama
gray-wilbee

fub-mcp

by gray-wilbee

update_text_message_template

Update an existing SMS template in Follow Up Boss to modify its name, message body, or sharing settings while keeping personalized merge fields intact.

Instructions

Update a text message template. (PUT /textMessageTemplates/{id}) FUB templates support %merge_field% placeholders that FUB substitutes when a human actually sends the template (not by this tool — this just saves the template text as-is). Reference: Contact: %contact_name% (full), %contact_first_name%, %contact_last_name%, %contact_email%, %contact_phone%, %contact_address%, %contact_street%, %contact_city%, %contact_state%, %contact_zipcode%, %contact_country%, %contact_rels_first_name% (first names of the contact's linked relationships, e.g. spouse/family added via peopleRelationships). Company (from Admin > Company settings): %company_name%, %company_phone%. Agent / Lender / Sender — same field set, swap the prefix (agent = assigned agent, lender = assigned lender, sender = whoever is actually sending this particular message, which may be neither): %agent_name%, %agent_first_name%, %agent_last_name%, %agent_email%, %agent_phone% (the FUB-assigned calling/texting number), %agent_mobile_phone% (their real/personal number), %agent_merge_field_1% (one free-form field each user sets in My Settings > Other Settings > Edit User Merge Field — commonly a booking link or social profile). ⚠️ %_phone% vs %mobile_phone% is genuinely ambiguous — always confirm with the user which one they mean before using either; picking wrong sends the recipient the wrong callback number. Inquiry (how the contact became a lead, e.g. clicking "Get more info" on a listing site): %inquiry_address%, %inquiry_address_url% (only if the lead source provided one), %inquiry_address_preview% (renders an HTML photo+link box — email only, meaningless in a plain-text SMS template). Recently viewed (populated only when synced with a provider that shares property views): %viewed_address%, %viewed_address_url%, %viewed_address_preview%, %last_5_preview% (up to 5 as HTML boxes, email only). Other: %source_name% (lead source, e.g. "Zillow" — "I saw your inquiry on %source_name%"), %greeting_time% ("Morning"/"Afternoon"/"Evening" based on send time — "Good %greeting_time%, %contact_first_name%"), %tour_time% (populated if the contact scheduled a tour via Zillow). Custom fields: %custom% (e.g. %custom_website%, %custom_birthday%, %custom_spouse_name%). Call list_custom_fields to confirm a field exists — but note its API name (e.g. customBirthday, camelCase) and its merge-field name (%custom_birthday%, snake_case) are different spellings of the same field, and there's no API that returns the merge-field spelling directly, so confirm the exact form with the user (or FUB's own Merge Fields dropdown in the template composer) if it's not obvious from the label. A merge field with no value for a given contact is simply left blank when the template is used — not an error, not a visible placeholder. Texting-specific, per FUB's own Compliance/Carrier Filtering guidance: initial/first-outreach text templates should include opt-out language ("Reply STOP to unsubscribe") and introduce the sender/company by name. Avoid designing a template purely for identical mass-blasting — carriers filter messages that look like spam, personalization (via merge fields) reduces that risk. If the template includes a URL, use the full URL rather than a shortened link, since shorteners are more likely to get carrier-filtered.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYes
nameYesThe name of your text message template.
messageYesThe body of your text message template.
isSharedNoSet to true if this template should be shared with other users in the same Follow Up Boss account.
extraBodyNoExtra raw JSON body fields not explicitly listed above — e.g. custom.* fields when creating/updating people or deals. Keys and values are sent as-is.
extraQueryNoExtra raw query parameters not explicitly listed above — e.g. FUB custom field filters like custom.ClosingDate on /people or /deals. Keys and values are sent as-is.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral burden and provides substantial context: it clarifies that merge fields are saved as-is and only substituted when a human sends the template, and that empty merge fields are left blank. It also warns about the ambiguous phone/mobile_phone fields and carrier filtering. It does not mention permissions or response shape, but it adds meaningful non-obvious behavior.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness2/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The first sentence is appropriately front-loaded, but the rest is a lengthy, multi-section reference manual and compliance essay. While the merge-field details are useful, their density makes the description unwieldy for tool selection and invocation. It should be condensed or relocated to separate documentation.

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?

Given no annotations or output schema, the description covers the hardest contextual parts: how merge fields behave, blank-value handling, ambiguous phone fields, and compliance considerations. It omits a few operational details like return value and permission requirements, but it is sufficient for correctly composing and invoking an update.

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

Parameters4/5

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

Schema coverage is 83%, so the baseline is 3, and the description adds real value for the message parameter by enumerating the full merge-field vocabulary with examples. The id parameter remains undocumented and the reference is not explicitly tied to input properties, but this goes beyond what the schema provides.

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 'Update a text message template' and gives the exact PUT endpoint, making the verb and resource explicit. This clearly distinguishes it from create_text_message_template, get_text_message_template, and the generic update_template.

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?

No guidance states when to use this tool versus creating a new template or listing existing templates. The note that merge fields are not substituted by this tool is behavioral, not a usage guideline. Selection is left to inference from the tool name.

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