Skip to main content
Glama
xuanji86

FastBound MCP

by xuanji86
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

Remove item from disposition

remove_disposition_items
Destructive

Remove an inventory item from a pending disposition by its GUID. Use the dry-run preview to verify, then confirm to apply the change.

Instructions

Remove an item from a pending disposition by its inventory item GUID. Dry-run by default; pass confirm:true. Write.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
itemIdYesGUID of the inventory item to remove from 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.
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.
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

A4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

The description discloses key behavioral context beyond the destructiveHint annotation: it is a dry-run by default, and execution requires confirm:true. It also labels the operation as 'Write,' reinforcing the mutation. This gives an agent a clear safety-relevant expectation without contradicting 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.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is two short sentences with no filler. The core action and the critical dry-run/confirm behavior are front-loaded, and the final 'Write.' is an efficient signal of mutability.

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, combined with 100% schema coverage and the destructiveHint annotation, covers the essential aspects: target, key, pending state, and confirmation requirement. It does not describe the dry-run response shape, but for a simple destructive tool with a schema this concise, that is a minor omission rather than a blocking gap.

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?

The input schema already provides 100% description coverage for all five parameters, so the baseline applies. The description mentions the inventory item GUID and confirm:true, but these merely echo the schema rather than adding deeper semantics or constraints.

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 names a specific verb ('Remove'), a specific resource ('item from a pending disposition'), and the identifying key ('inventory item GUID'). This clearly differentiates it from siblings like add_disposition_items, delete_disposition, and undispose_item.

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 states that the operation targets a pending disposition and that confirmation is required via confirm:true, which implies when to use it. However, it does not explicitly contrast it with alternatives such as undispose_item or list_disposition_items, leaving the usage boundaries to be inferred.

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