alza-mcp

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

Prepare an Alza mutation

prepare_mutation

Read-only

Generate a single-use confirmation token for a specific Alza action, required before performing sensitive mutations like placing orders or updating addresses.

Instructions

Start a two-step mutation by returning a one-time confirmation token bound to exactly one action. This call itself sends nothing to Alza. Use it before the high-impact typed mutations — register (action register), address_upsert (address_create or address_edit), address_delete (address_delete), pay_after_order (after_order_payment), web_place_order (web_place_order), web_pay_after_order (web_after_order_payment), review_submit (review_submit), subscription_activate (subscription_activate), subscription_update_installment (subscription_update_installment), upload_attachment (attachment_upload) — and before any low-risk mutate_list action (create, rename, delete, add, remove, move, set_country, set_isic, add_gift, add_order_service, set_watchdog, send_feedback, submit_discussion, rate_discussion, coupon_add, coupon_remove, basket_update, basket_unlock). Pass the returned token as confirmation_token on the matching call; the token is single-use and only valid for the exact action you prepared. Do not use for read-only tools, and not for add_to_cart (which is a low-risk cart write that needs no token).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`action`	Yes	Which mutation you are about to perform; the token will only be accepted by that action's tool.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`action`	Yes
`confirmationToken`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.3.0Sep 15, 2026

TDQS

A4.9/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the readOnlyHint annotation, the description discloses critical behavioral details: the call itself sends nothing, the token is single-use, bound to exactly one action, and must be passed as confirmation_token on the matching call. This adds significant transparency about the token lifecycle and the two-step nature, which annotations alone do not convey.

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 long but every sentence serves a purpose. It front-loads the core purpose, then systematically lists use cases, explains the token mechanics, and ends with exclusions. The structure is logical and avoids redundancy; the length is justified by the need to enumerate many actions.

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?

Given the tool's complexity (many actions, two-step flow) and the presence of an output schema, the description is complete. It covers when to use, how to use, what the token is for, and what it is not for. No critical information is missing for an agent to correctly invoke this tool.

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 schema already documents the 'action' parameter with an enum and description, so baseline is 3. The description adds value by mapping each action value to its corresponding tool name (e.g., 'register' → register tool, 'address_create' → address_upsert), which is not present in the schema. This helps the agent understand the relationship between actions and tools, though the core parameter meaning is already clear.

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 the tool's role as the first step of a two-step mutation, returning a one-time confirmation token bound to exactly one action. It distinguishes itself from siblings by explicitly stating it sends nothing to Alza and is used before other mutation tools, which makes its purpose unambiguous.

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?

The description provides explicit guidance on when to use this tool: before the listed high-impact typed mutations and low-risk mutate_list actions, and explicitly states when NOT to use it (read-only tools and add_to_cart). It even names the alternative for add_to_cart, giving clear exclusions and context.

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