Skip to main content
Glama
xuanji86

FastBound MCP

by xuanji86
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

Commit disposition

commit_disposition

Preview then commit a pending disposition to the A&D book. Set confirm:true to finalize, which may trigger Multiple Sale and FFL acquisition records.

Instructions

Commit a pending disposition to the A&D book — the point of no return. May trigger a Multiple Sale report and, for FFL transfers, auto-create the recipient's acquisition (reported via headers). Dry-run by default; pass confirm:true. Write.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYesGUID of the pending disposition to commit.
accountNoWhich configured FastBound account to use for this one call — an alias or account number (see list_accounts). Omit to use the active account.
confirmNoSet true to actually execute. Omit or false returns a DRY RUN preview that sends nothing.
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.
otherTransfereeEmailsNoRecipient FFL user emails for an FFL transfer.

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

A4.6/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the sparse annotations, the description discloses irreversibility, the dry-run safety default, the confirm gate, and consequential side effects such as Multiple Sale reports and auto-created FFL recipient acquisitions. This is exactly the behavioral context an agent needs before invoking a write operation.

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?

Three short sentences front-load the purpose and risk, then side effects, then the execution requirement. The final 'Write.' is a concise mutation cue that earns its place given the otherwise sparse annotations.

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

Completeness4/5

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

For a mutating tool with no output schema, it covers the decision-critical facts: default no-op behavior, how to execute, and what side effects may result. Account selection and audit-user mechanics are left to the schema, which is acceptable because schema coverage is complete.

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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so parameters are already documented. The description adds value by explaining the confirm flag's dry-run behavior and causally linking FFL transfer side effects to the transfer-emails concept, which goes beyond the bare schema descriptions.

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 uses a specific verb and resource — 'Commit a pending disposition to the A&D book' — and reinforces it with 'the point of no return.' This distinguishes it clearly from staging tools like create_pending_disposition and read-only disposition tools.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

It clearly frames this tool as the finalizing step for pending dispositions and gives concrete execution guidance: dry-run by default, pass confirm:true to actually commit. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the context is unambiguous enough for an agent to select it correctly.

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