Skip to main content
Glama
xuanji86

FastBound MCP

by xuanji86
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

Create pending disposition

create_pending_disposition

Creates an uncommitted disposition draft with no immediate ATF effect, letting you add inventory items and commit later when ready.

Instructions

Create a PENDING (uncommitted) disposition draft. No ATF effect until committed, so it executes directly. Add items with add_disposition_items, then finalise with commit_disposition. Write.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
dateYesDisposition date (ISO, required).
noteNo
otsnNo
ttsnNo
typeNo
itemsNo
accountNoWhich configured FastBound account to use for this one call — an alias or account number (see list_accounts). Omit to use the active account.
contactNoInline new recipient contact (alternative to contactId).
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.
contactIdNoExisting recipient/buyer contact GUID.
requestTypeYes
generateTTSNNo
invoiceNumberNo
contactExternalIdNo
purchaseOrderNumberNo
otherTransfereeEmailsNo
shipmentTrackingNumberNo

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

A3.8/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Beyond the destructiveHint=false annotation, the description discloses a key behavioral trait: the disposition has no ATF effect until committed and executes directly. The trailing 'Write.' also signals that this is a mutating operation. It does not mention return behavior or error conditions, but the most important safety-relevant behavior is covered.

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 and front-loaded with the core purpose. The final one-word sentence 'Write.' is terse and somewhat cryptic, but the overall structure is efficient and easy to scan.

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?

Given the tool has 17 parameters, nested objects, no output schema, and a large sibling set, the description is not complete enough. It omits required parameter details, return value information, and account selection guidance. Additionally, the schema allows an 'items' array directly, but the description instructs using add_disposition_items instead, creating ambiguity.

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?

With only 29% schema description coverage and 17 parameters, the description needed to compensate by explaining key parameters, but it does not. It only mentions sibling tools for adding/committing items, not the meaning of date, requestType, contact, account, or other parameters. The schema alone leaves many parameters effectively undocumented.

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 the tool creates a PENDING (uncommitted) disposition draft, using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself by explicitly noting there is no ATF effect until committed, which separates it from commit_disposition and other disposition tools. This is unambiguous and actionable.

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?

The description provides clear workflow context: create the pending draft, then add items via add_disposition_items, then finalise with commit_disposition. It does not explicitly list alternatives or exclusions, but the sequence guidance makes the intended usage obvious among the many sibling disposition tools.

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