Skip to main content
Glama

update_row

Update specific fields of an existing row. Only the fields provided in data are updated; others are preserved. Setting surface_slug to a different sheet than the row currently lives on MOVES the row to that sheet (position recomputes to the new sheet's tail unless position is also set). Same surface as current → no-op move.

Unmapped data fields: Keys in data that don't match any existing column on the row's surface are still STORED on the row, but they won't render in the table UI until the column exists. The response carries an unmapped_fields array plus a human-readable warning. Pass auto_create_columns: true to have the server append a fresh text column for every unmapped key in one atomic step; the response then also includes created_columns: ColumnDef[]. Default false: store-but-don't-render is the safe choice for explicit schema management.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
dataYesPartial row data with fields to update (e.g. {"status": "sealed"}). Pass an empty object {} when the call is purely a move (surface_slug change with no field updates).
slugYesThe workspace slug. Accepts either the bare slug ('my-workspace') or the org-prefixed form ('my-org/my-workspace') as shown in the dashboard URL; both resolve to the same workspace.
rowIdYesThe row ID to update
positionNoOptional. Override the row's position. When moving across surfaces, omit to land at the new surface's tail; pass a number to land at a specific slot.
surface_slugNoOptional. When set to a different surface than the row currently lives on, moves the row to that surface and emits a `row.moved_surface` event. Same-surface is a no-op. 400 if the slug is a doc surface, archived, or not in this workspace.
auto_create_columnsNoWhen true, the server auto-creates a text column for every key in `data` that doesn't already exist on the surface, then applies the update in the same call. Returns `created_columns` in the response. Default false: unmapped keys are still merged into row.data but won't render in the UI until you `add_column` them yourself.

TDQS

A4.7/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses the move behavior (position recompute, tail unless position set, same-surface no-op), unmapped fields storage without rendering, response containing unmapped_fields and warning, and the atomic auto-create behavior with created_columns. This is exceptional transparency.

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 dense but well-organized, using bold headers to separate core update behavior from unmapped data handling. No redundant sentences; all information is essential.

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?

Given the tool's complexity (6 params, no output schema, no annotations), this description covers edge cases, return values, and interactive behaviors comprehensively. It's complete for an agent to use correctly.

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 already covers all 6 parameters with 100% coverage. The description adds extra semantic context beyond schema, such as the unmapped_fields response array, the atomic behavior of auto_create_columns, and how position interacts with surface_slug moves. This adds value over 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?

The description opens with 'Update specific fields of an existing row,' clearly identifying the verb and resource. It distinguishes from siblings like create_row and delete_row, and even addresses the row-moving overlap with move_rows by explaining when surface_slug moves a row and when it's a no-op.

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 explains partial update semantics ('Only the fields provided in data are updated; others are preserved') and gives guidance on auto_create_columns default being 'safe choice for explicit schema management.' However, it doesn't explicitly name alternatives like 'use move_rows for bulk moves' or state when not to use this tool, so it's clear but lacks explicit exclusions.

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

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Disambiguation4/5

Most tools have clearly distinct purposes, with detailed descriptions that prevent confusion. The main ambiguity arises from send_message vs. the referenced but missing message_teammate tool, and add_column vs. update_surface for schema changes, but these are mostly clarified by the descriptions.

Naming Consistency4/5

The naming convention is predominantly verb_noun with underscores (e.g., create_workspace, list_rows, update_doc). Exceptions like 'search' and 'address_book' (no noun) and the two-word 'react_to_comment' are minor deviations in an otherwise consistent pattern.

Tool Count1/5

With 68 tools, the surface is far too large for an MCP server, exceeding the 50+ threshold for extreme mismatch. This volume creates excessive selection overhead for agents and suggests the tool set could be consolidated or split into focused servers.

Completeness3/5

The server covers broad functionality across workspaces, docs, tables, HTML, comments, files, webhooks, and billing. However, notable gaps exist: the explicitly referenced message_teammate tool is missing (preventing agent-to-agent waking), and there is no create/upload file tool or create API key tool, which creates dead ends in workflows.