Skip to main content
Glama
mh-zeynal

gapify-mcp-server

by mh-zeynal

Help Center: Add a new category

gapify_add_category

Creates a new category in a help center portal, supporting parent and associated categories, locale, slug, and position. Use it to structure portal content into navigable sections.

Instructions

Add a category to a help center portal [Help Center] POST /api/v1/accounts/{account_id}/portals/{portal_id}/categories Auth: User API key (header api-access-token). Body fields: description, locale, name, slug, position, portal_id, account_id, associated_category_id, parent_category_id. Extra fields can be passed via extra_body. Text values may be written in Persian (Farsi) or any other language and are sent unchanged; IDs, numbers and phone numbers may use Persian or Arabic-Indic digits.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameNoCategory name
slugNoCategory slug
localeNoCategory locale Example: "en/es"
positionNoCategory position in the portal list to sort Example: 0
portal_idYesportal_id (string)
account_idYesThe numeric ID of the account
extra_bodyNoAdditional JSON body fields to merge into the request (for keys not listed above).
descriptionNoCategory description
parent_category_idNoTo define parent category, e.g product documentation has multiple level features in sales category or in engineering category. Example: 1
associated_category_idNoTo associate similar categories to each other, e.g same category of product documentation in different languages Example: 1

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.1

TDQS

A4.1/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare that this is a non-read-only, open-world, non-idempotent, non-destructive write operation. The description adds useful operational context beyond annotations: the auth header, the exact POST endpoint, the extra_body passthrough mechanism, and the Persian/Arabic-Indic digit handling. It does not cover duplicate-name behavior or rate limits, but it is more transparent than most mutation-tool descriptions.

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 front-loaded with the core purpose and then layers endpoint, auth, body fields, and the i18n note in a compact paragraph. It is efficient overall, though the body-field enumeration duplicates what the schema already lists.

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?

For a write API wrapper with no output schema, the description covers auth, endpoint, parameter surface, extra_body, and input language handling. Annotations cover the safety profile, so the remaining omission around error/response behavior is acceptable, though not fully complete for an agent expecting side-effect detail.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents all ten parameters and the 3 baseline applies. The description adds cross-cutting meaning that the schema does not provide, notably how text values may be Persian/Farsi and how IDs/numbers may use Persian or Arabic-Indic digits, plus the extra_body merge behavior. It mostly restates field names, but the language/digit note is meaningful parameter guidance.

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 states a specific verb and resource: 'Add a category to a help center portal.' It distinguishes this from sibling tools like gapify_add_portal and gapify_add_article by naming the exact resource (category) and scope (help center portal), so an agent can select it correctly.

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?

Usage is implied by the tool name and the phrase 'Add a category to a help center portal,' but there is no explicit guidance on when to use this versus related tools. No alternatives or exclusions are named, so the agent must infer the correct context.

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