Elaichi

elaichi__synthetic_tool__update

Edit a synthetic tool's definition — name, description, input_schema, steps or output_template. MERGE at the top level: fields you omit keep their current value. Sending steps is a WHOLESALE REPLACE of the step list, same as toolbox.set_entries — resend every step you want to keep, not only the ones you changed. The merged definition (your patch layered over what is stored) is re-validated as a whole exactly as synthetic_tool.create validates a new one, so an unrelated field edit can still fail if it leaves the stored steps inconsistent with a new input_schema. A step whose (connection_id, tool_name) pair is unchanged from what is already stored rides forward without re-checking your access to that connection — protects an honest read-modify-write from being refused by a restriction written after the step was first saved — but any step that is new, or that changes tool_name while keeping connection_id, is validated fresh against your CURRENT access and restrictions. OWNER-ONLY, same as every other synthetic-tool operation: this needs toolbox:create or toolbox:manage to call at all (the coarse permission gate PATCH /synthetic-tool/:id enforces), but that permission is not the real gate — unlike toolbox.update, a toolbox:manage holder who does not own this tool still gets the exact same 404 an unknown id gets, never access. Read synthetic_tool.get first: this endpoint does not tell you what changed, only the result after. Returns the updated record, the same shape synthetic_tool.get returns.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`id`	Yes	Synthetic tool id (`syn_…`) from synthetic_tool.list.
`name`	No	New name — sanitized and uniqueness-checked the same as at creation. Omit to leave unchanged.
`steps`	No	The COMPLETE step list — WHOLESALE REPLACE on update, never a merge. At least one step; every step key must be unique and dependency-free of cycles.
`description`	No	New description. Omit to leave unchanged; unlike toolbox.update this cannot be cleared to null — it is always required text.
`input_schema`	No	Replacement input_schema. Omit to leave unchanged.
`output_template`	No	Replacement output_template, or null to clear it back to the default output. Omit to leave unchanged.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedSep 18, 2026

TDQS

A5/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations indicate a non-readonly, non-idempotent, non-destructive operation, but the description adds critical behavioral detail: top-level merge vs wholesale steps replacement, full re-validation, the nuanced access-control rule (owner-only, with a toolbox:manage holder getting a 404 if not the owner), and the step-riding-forward exception. This far exceeds what annotations convey.

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?

Though long, every sentence carries essential information. The structure front-loads the purpose, then merge semantics, steps replacement, validation, and access control in a logical order. There is no redundancy or filler; the density is justified by the tool's complexity.

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

Completeness5/5

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

With no output schema, the description explicitly states the return shape ('the same shape synthetic_tool.get returns') and points the agent to read get first. It covers merge behavior, validation, access control, and steps replacement, leaving no gap an agent would need to guess about for correct invocation.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters5/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100%, but the description adds meaning beyond the schema: it clarifies the MERGE behavior at the top level, that steps is a wholesale replace (and to resend every step), and that validation can fail due to unrelated field edits. These are critical nuances not present in the schema.

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 ('Edit') and a specific resource ('synthetic tool's definition') and enumerates the exact fields it operates on. It also differentiates from related tools by contrasting with synthetic_tool.create and toolbox.update, making the purpose unmistakable.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

Explicitly instructs the agent to read synthetic_tool.get first and explains why (the endpoint only returns the result, not what changed). It also contrasts with toolbox.update regarding ownership and permission semantics, giving clear when-to-use and when-not-to-use guidance.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

All Elaichi tools Inspect

Try in Browser

One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources

Need Help?