Skip to main content
Glama
xuanji86

FastBound MCP

by xuanji86
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

Add items to disposition

add_disposition_items

Add inventory items to a pending disposition by GUID with optional sale price to accurately record firearm transfers in FastBound.

Instructions

Add inventory items (by GUID, optionally with a price) to a pending disposition. Executes directly. Write.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
itemsYesInventory items (by GUID) to add to a pending disposition.
accountNoWhich configured FastBound account to use for this one call — an alias or account number (see list_accounts). Omit to use the active account.
auditUserNoEmail recorded as X-AuditUser for the ATF audit trail. Overrides FASTBOUND_AUDIT_USER for this call. Must be an active user on the account.
dispositionIdYesGUID of the pending disposition.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv0.2.0
    • addedInput schema / properties / account
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Which configured FastBound account to use for this one call — an alias or account number (see list_accounts). Omit to use the active account.",
+  "type": "string"
+}
  2. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations only provide destructiveHint=false, leaving the description to convey that this is a mutating call; 'Executes directly. Write.' does communicate an immediate side effect rather than a dry run. It does not disclose duplicate-item behavior, effects on disposition totals, or reversibility beyond the existence of a sibling remove tool, but the basic write nature is stated.

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 short, front-loaded, and scannable, with the core function in the first sentence. 'Write.' is somewhat redundant with 'Add' and 'Executes directly.' is arguably unnecessary, so a couple of words do not earn their place, but the overall structure is still efficient.

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

Completeness3/5

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

For a four-parameter mutation with no output schema and sparse annotations, this is minimally workable: it identifies the target disposition state, item identifier, and optional price. Missing are lifecycle context such as requiring a pending disposition created by create_pending_disposition and the eventual need to commit_disposition, plus any error or duplicate-item behavior.

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 the structured schema already documents all four parameters. The description's 'by GUID, optionally with a price' adds only lightweight context that mirrors the schema's id and price descriptions rather than meaningfully enhancing them.

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: 'Add inventory items (by GUID, optionally with a price) to a pending disposition.' The pending-disposition qualifier and item/price detail clearly distinguish it from related disposition tools such as dispose, create_pending_disposition, and remove_disposition_items.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

The phrase 'to a pending disposition' implies this is for draft dispositions and not committed ones, giving some usage context. However, no alternatives are named and there is no explicit when-not-to-use guidance, so the agent must infer the lifecycle relationship to commit_disposition and remove_disposition_items.

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