Skip to main content
Glama
jaakla

Merit MCP

by jaakla
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Remote

Merit Write Customers

merit_write_customers
Read-only

Preview customer creation or update without executing changes; returns operation details and a confirmation code for later confirmation.

Instructions

Preview-only write tool. Does not execute changes; returns intended operation details and a confirmation_code for merit_write_customers_confirm. Create or update customers. Actions: customer_upsert: Create or update a customer.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idNo
actionYes
bank_idNo
filtersNo
payloadNo
confirmedNo
delivnoteNo
add_attachmentNo
confirmation_codeNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changedv0.5.0
    • changedInput schema / properties / filters / anyOf
      Previous value: -[
-  {
-    "additionalProperties": true,
-    "type": "object"
-  },
-  {
-    "type": "null"
-  }
-]New value: +[
+  {
+    "additionalProperties": true,
+    "type": "object"
+  },
+  {
+    "type": "string"
+  },
+  {
+    "type": "null"
+  }
+]
    • changedInput schema / properties / payload / anyOf
      Previous value: -[
-  {
-    "additionalProperties": true,
-    "type": "object"
-  },
-  {
-    "items": {
-      "additionalProperties": true,
-      "type": "object"
-    },
-    "type": "array"
-  },
-  {
-    "type": "null"
-  }
-]New value: +[
+  {
+    "additionalProperties": true,
+    "type": "object"
+  },
+  {
+    "items": {
+      "additionalProperties": true,
+      "type": "object"
+    },
+    "type": "array"
+  },
+  {
+    "type": "string"
+  },
+  {
+    "type": "null"
+  }
+]
  2. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A3.9/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, and the description usefully explains WHY that is true — it is a dry-run that returns intended operations plus a confirmation_code rather than mutating. It leaves a real gap, though: the schema contains a 'confirmed' boolean that could plausibly execute the change, and the description never explains whether this tool can ever commit or how idempotency works across repeated previews.

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?

Three short sentences with the most decision-relevant fact (preview-only, no execution) placed first, which is exactly the right ordering. The final action gloss ('customer_upsert: Create or update a customer') restates the preceding sentence almost verbatim, so a small amount of text is not earning its place.

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

Completeness3/5

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

For a preview-write tool with 9 undocumented parameters and no output schema, the description covers the confirm workflow but omits the shape of the returned preview and the semantics of most inputs. It is enough to know which tool to call first, but not enough to call it correctly without opening the schema.

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% across 9 parameters, so the description must carry parameter meaning and largely does not. Only 'action' (customer_upsert) and 'confirmation_code' are addressed; id, bank_id, filters, payload, confirmed, delivnote, and add_attachment are never explained, leaving an agent to guess what payload shape or filter syntax customer_upsert expects.

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 names a specific verb+resource ('Create or update customers') and front-loads the distinguishing property ('Preview-only write tool. Does not execute changes'), so an agent can tell it apart from merit_write_customers_confirm and the read_* siblings immediately. It also enumerates the single supported action, customer_upsert.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

It makes the workflow condition explicit: this tool returns a confirmation_code that must be fed to merit_write_customers_confirm, implying you call this one first and only confirm afterwards. It never states when NOT to use it or what happens if the preview is skipped, so it stops short of full routing guidance.

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