Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Stables MCP Server

Stables MCP Server

Official
by stables-money
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

Update customer

update_customer
DestructiveIdempotent

Updates customer details, entitlements, or verification information by customer ID to maintain accurate records.

Instructions

Update customer details, entitlements, or verification information

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": {
      "customerId": "<customerId>"
    },
    "name": "update_customer"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
dobNoUpdated date of birth (YYYY-MM-DD)
emailNoUpdated email address
phoneNoUpdated phone number
lastNameNoUpdated last name
firstNameNoUpdated first name
customerIdYesThe customer ID to update
middleNameNoUpdated middle name
companyNameNoUpdated company name (for businesses)
nationalityNoUpdated nationality (two-letter country code)
entitlementsNoUpdated entitlements

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv2.6.11
    • removedInput schema / additionalProperties
      Removed value: -false
  2. Changed1 schema field changedv2.4.0
    • changedInput schema / properties / entitlements / items / enum
      Previous value: -[
-  "base_payout",
-  "virtual_account"
-]New value: +[
+  "base_payout",
+  "virtual_account",
+  "eur_virtual_account",
+  "gbp_virtual_account",
+  "usd_virtual_account",
+  "aed_local"
+]
  3. First observedv1.4.0

TDQS

C2.9/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=true, so the safety profile is partly covered. However, the description adds nothing beyond that: it does not say that a destructive update replaces values, whether omitted fields are left untouched (partial vs full replace), what the array of entitlements does to existing entitlements, or what happens to downstream verification status.

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?

A single short sentence with no wasted words, front-loaded with the verb and resource. It is efficient, though the brevity edges toward under-specification rather than ideal conciseness.

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?

For a destructive, 10-parameter mutation with no output schema, the description is thin: it omits partial-update semantics, entitlements replacement behavior, permission or verification prerequisites, and how it relates to update_customer_metadata and the entitlement tools. The structured fields cover parameters but not the operational context an agent needs before calling it.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so every one of the 10 parameters is already documented in the input schema. The description only loosely groups fields into 'details, entitlements, verification information', which adds little beyond the schema; baseline 3 applies.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb and resource ('Update customer') plus the three field families it covers (details, entitlements, verification information). It is clear what the tool does, but it never distinguishes itself from the closely related sibling update_customer_metadata, and 'verification information' has no corresponding parameter in the schema, which blurs the scope.

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?

There is no statement of when to use this tool versus alternatives. With siblings like update_customer_metadata, request_entitlements, and submit_entitlement_requirements in the toolset, an agent has no signal about whether entitlements should go through this tool or the entitlement-specific ones, nor whether prerequisites (e.g. KYC state) apply.

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