Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
mcploy

mcploy

by ogarciabrena
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

Create customer

loyverse_create_customer

Add a customer to Loyverse via the API. Send customer fields; on error, the API message indicates what to fix.

Instructions

Create a new customer in Loyverse (POST /customers). Field names follow the Loyverse API v1.0 (developer.loyverse.com/docs). If a call fails with a 400, the error message from Loyverse is returned verbatim — adjust the fields and retry.

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": {
      "body": "<body>"
    },
    "name": "loyverse_create_customer"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
bodyYesThe customer fields, per the Loyverse API schema.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A3.9/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden. It discloses the API endpoint, that fields follow external docs, and that 400 errors return verbatim messages. However, it does not mention what happens on success (e.g., return of created object) or any side effects.

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 two sentences, front-loading the purpose and endpoint in the first sentence, and adding error guidance in the second. No wasted words.

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?

Given the tool's complexity (single nested parameter, no output schema), the description covers purpose, endpoint, field reference, and error handling. However, it lacks information about the return value upon success, which is needed for full context.

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?

The input schema has 100% coverage for the 'body' parameter but its description is vague. The tool description adds value by referencing the Loyverse API v1.0 documentation and providing error handling context, helping the agent understand how to construct and debug the body.

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 explicitly states 'Create a new customer in Loyverse (POST /customers)', which is a specific verb and resource. It clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like update or delete by focusing on creation.

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 implies usage for creating new customers, but does not provide explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance compared to other customer-related tools. The error handling note is useful but not a usage alternative.

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