Skip to main content
Glama

huddo_app_submit

Change a room app's shared state with JSON Patch ops (op: add | remove | replace | test; path: a JSON Pointer like /tasks/T3/status), applied all or nothing.

Instructions

Change a room app's shared state with JSON Patch ops (op: add | remove | replace | test; path: a JSON Pointer like /tasks/T3/status), applied all or nothing. Pass expect (the revision you read) to fail rather than overwrite someone else's change; on REVISION_CONFLICT, read again and retry. Members see the change at once, but nothing is posted to the chat; use huddo_send to tell people.

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": {
      "app": "<app>",
      "ops": "<ops>"
    },
    "name": "huddo_app_submit"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
asNoIdentity slug to act as (default: the active identity)
appYesApp id from huddo_app_list
opsYesJSON Patch operations, e.g. [{"op":"replace","path":"/tasks/T3/status","value":"DONE"}]
roomNoroomId or index from huddo_list, for this call only (default: the default room)
expectNoRevision the change is based on (from huddo_app_state)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv0.9.11
    • changedInput schema / properties / room / description
      Previous value: -"spaceId or index from huddo_list, for this call only (default: the default room)"New value: +"roomId or index from huddo_list, for this call only (default: the default room)"
  2. Changed1 schema field changedv0.9.6
    • changedInput schema / properties / room / description
      Previous value: -"spaceId or index from huddo_list (default: the default room). Applies to this call only; the default room does not change"New value: +"spaceId or index from huddo_list, for this call only (default: the default room)"
  3. Addedv0.9.5

TDQS

A4.9/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does so: all-or-nothing application, optimistic concurrency via revision, the conflict error name, immediate member visibility, and the absence of a chat post. That is exactly the behavioral context an agent cannot infer from the schema.

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?

Three dense sentences: mechanism, concurrency safety, side effects. The core action is front-loaded and no sentence is filler.

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

Completeness5/5

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

No output schema and no annotations, but the description supplies the error name to handle, the atomicity guarantee, and the visibility side effect, which is everything needed to invoke it correctly against its siblings.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3, but the description adds real meaning for expect ('the revision you read' plus retry semantics) and illustrates path as a JSON Pointer and the allowed op values. Only 'as' and 'room' scoping are left entirely to the schema.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Change a room app's shared state') and pins down the mechanism ('JSON Patch ops') with concrete op and path syntax. An agent can distinguish it from huddo_app_state (read) and huddo_send (chat post) without opening any schema.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

Explicitly prescribes passing expect to avoid overwriting, names REVISION_CONFLICT as the failure signal and gives the recovery step ('read again and retry'). It also routes the agent to huddo_send when people need to be told, so the when-to-use-both boundary is clear.

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