Despezzas MCP

Editar Perfil Compartilhado

despezzas_update_profile_access

Destructive

Edit a shared profile and replace its list of invites or members. Requires confirmation to apply changes.

Instructions

Operação de escrita. Edita um perfil compartilhado. Se invites for informado, ele substitui a lista de convites/membros. Exige confirm: true.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "id": "<id>"
    },
    "name": "despezzas_update_profile_access"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`id`	Yes	ID do perfil compartilhado em despezzas_list_profiles.
`name`	No
`type`	No
`confirm`	No
`invites`	No

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Jul 4, 2026

TDQS

B3.3/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Beyond the annotation destructiveHint=true, the description explicitly states it is a write operation, explains that invites replaces the existing list, and emphasizes the need for confirm=true. This adds useful behavioral context.

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 concise with three short sentences, front-loading the key action. It could be slightly more structured, but it efficiently communicates essential points.

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 the tool has 5 parameters and an output schema (not shown), the description is incomplete. It only addresses invites and confirm, omitting that name and type are also modifiable. This is insufficient for a full understanding of the tool's capabilities.

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 only 20% (only id described). The description compensates partially by explaining the invites replacement behavior and the confirm requirement, but it fails to clarify the meaning or usage of name and type parameters.

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 it is a write operation that edits a shared profile, which is distinct from sibling tools like create_profile or delete_profile. However, it could be more specific about which fields are updatable beyond invites.

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 provides some usage guidance, such as the effect of the invites parameter and the requirement of confirm=true. However, it does not specify when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it mention prerequisites or exclusion criteria.

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

Deploy Server