grubhub-mcp

change_password

Update your Grubhub account password by providing your current password and a new password.

Instructions

change account password. (AUTH'D)

Args: current_password: Current password new_password: New password

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": {
      "current_password": "<current_password>",
      "new_password": "<new_password>"
    },
    "name": "change_password"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`current_password`	Yes
`new_password`	Yes

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.0Jun 18, 2026

TDQS

B3.1/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It states the tool changes the password but does not mention side effects (e.g., session invalidation, re-login requirements, or idempotency). The behavioral impact is largely opaque.

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 extremely concise—one sentence plus a parameter list. It is efficient with no wasted words, though it could be slightly expanded to include useful behavioral notes without losing brevity.

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

Completeness2/5

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

The description omits critical contextual information for a password-changing tool, such as whether the operation requires the current password verification (implied but not stated), what happens after success (e.g., logout), or any error conditions. The presence of an output schema (not shown) reduces the need to describe return values, but the overall completeness is low.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The input schema has 0% description coverage, so the description must compensate. It provides basic explanations for both parameters ('Current password', 'New password'), which clarifies their roles but lacks details on constraints like length or composition rules.

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 'change account password', which is a specific verb+resource combination. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like 'login', 'logout', and 'send_password_reset', making the tool's 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 Guidelines2/5

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

The description only includes '(AUTH'D)' to indicate authentication is required, but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as 'send_password_reset' for forgotten passwords. No usage context or exclusions are given.

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