Skip to main content
Glama
xuanji86

FastBound MCP

by xuanji86
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

Edit disposition item price

edit_disposition_item_price
Idempotent

Update the sale price of an inventory item on a pending disposition to ensure accurate transaction records.

Instructions

Set the sale price of an item on a pending disposition. Executes directly. Write.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYesGUID of the disposition.
priceYesNew sale price.
itemIdYesGUID of the inventory item on the 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.

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

A3.5/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare idempotentHint=true and destructiveHint=false. The description adds that the operation is a 'Write' and 'Executes directly,' which conveys immediate mutation. It does not elaborate on side effects, audit implications, or account selection, but it does not contradict the annotations.

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 very short and front-loads the core action. 'Executes directly' adds useful behavior, though the trailing 'Write.' is arguably redundant with both that phrase and the annotations. Overall, it is compact with no significant waste.

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?

The description supplies the key condition ('pending disposition') and execution behavior ('Executes directly'), while schema and annotations cover parameters, idempotency, and non-destructiveness. It leaves side effects unspecified and there is no output schema, but for a simple price-setting operation the provided information is sufficient for correct use.

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?

All parameters are fully described in the input schema (100% coverage), so the schema carries the parameter documentation burden. The description adds little beyond restating that the sale price is being set, which matches the baseline expectation for full schema coverage.

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 operation: 'Set the sale price of an item on a pending disposition.' It identifies the verb, resource, and lifecycle constraint. It does not explicitly name or contrast with sibling tools, but the scope is specific enough that an agent can understand the tool's primary function.

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 description gives useful context by restricting the action to a 'pending disposition' and noting that it 'Executes directly.' However, it does not say when to avoid this tool or mention alternatives such as update_disposition, update_item, or add_disposition_items, so usage guidance is only implied.

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