Skip to main content
Glama
stier1ba

LicenseSpring MCP Server

by stier1ba

Borrow Floating License

floating_borrow

Allocate a floating license for offline use by specifying license key, hardware ID, product, and duration via the LicenseSpring MCP Server.

Instructions

Borrow a floating license for offline use

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
borrowed_untilYes
hardware_idYes
license_keyYes
productYes

Implementation Reference

  • The handler function that executes the floating_borrow tool logic: makes a POST request to the LicenseSpring API endpoint '/api/v4/floating/borrow' and returns the response or formatted error.
    }, async ({ license_key, hardware_id, product, borrowed_until }) => {
      try {
        const response = await apiClient.post('/api/v4/floating/borrow', {
          license_key,
          hardware_id,
          product,
          borrowed_until,
        });
    
        return {
          content: [{
            type: 'text',
            text: JSON.stringify(response.data, null, 2),
          }],
        };
      } catch (error) {
        return {
          content: [{
            type: 'text',
            text: `Error borrowing floating license: ${handleApiError(error)}`,
          }],
          isError: true,
        };
      }
    });
  • Zod input validation schema for the floating_borrow tool parameters.
    inputSchema: {
      license_key: z.string().min(1, 'License key is required'),
      hardware_id: z.string().min(1, 'Hardware ID is required'),
      product: z.string().min(1, 'Product code is required'),
      borrowed_until: z.string().min(1, 'Borrow expiration date is required'),
    },
  • Registers the floating_borrow tool with the MCP server.
    server.registerTool('floating_borrow', {
  • TypeScript interface defining the input shape for FloatingBorrowRequest, used for typing the tool handler parameters.
    export interface FloatingBorrowRequest {
      license_key: string;
      hardware_id: string;
      product: string;
      borrowed_until: string;
    }
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden but offers minimal behavioral insight. It mentions the purpose ('for offline use') but doesn't disclose critical behaviors like whether this consumes license seats, requires specific permissions, has time limits beyond the 'borrowed_until' parameter, or what happens on failure. The mutation nature ('Borrow') implies a state change but isn't elaborated.

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 a single, efficient sentence with zero wasted words. It's appropriately sized for a simple tool and front-loads the core purpose without unnecessary elaboration.

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 4-parameter mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is inadequate. It lacks parameter explanations, behavioral details, error handling, and output expectations. While concise, it doesn't provide enough context for safe and effective use given the tool's complexity and lack of structured documentation.

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

Parameters2/5

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

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate but adds no parameter information. It doesn't explain what 'license_key', 'hardware_id', 'product', or 'borrowed_until' represent, their formats, or relationships. This leaves all 4 required parameters undocumented beyond their names in the schema.

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?

The description clearly states the action ('Borrow') and resource ('a floating license') with a specific purpose ('for offline use'). It distinguishes from obvious siblings like 'floating_release' but doesn't explicitly differentiate from other license management tools like 'activate_offline' or 'deactivate_offline'.

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 implies usage context ('for offline use') but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'activate_offline' or 'deactivate_offline'. There's no mention of prerequisites, constraints, or typical scenarios for borrowing versus other license operations.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Related Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/stier1ba/licensespring-mcp'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server