ZeroWidth

Edit an opportunity

compass_opportunities_update

Destructive

Corrects an opportunity's content: label, description, priority, what done means, the 1–5 value / feasibility / risk scores, the owner (a PERSON page), notes, tags, workflow anchor, external link, visibility. Fields you omit are untouched; the lane is NOT here — move it with compass_opportunities_set_status. Opportunity ids come from compass_opportunities_list. May return needs_confirmation — say what you're changing and wait.

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`tags`	No	New tag set — replaces existing tags.
`label`	No	New one-line label (2–200 chars).
`assignee`	No	The workspace member doing the work, by email or user id; null unassigns. They're notified.
`doneWhen`	No	What's true when it's done, that someone else could check (≤1,000 chars).
`priority`	No	How soon it matters; null clears it, and the map's suggestion shows again.
`riskScore`	No
`workspace`	No	Workspace slug. Personal tokens with no default workspace MUST pass this; tokens with a default can override per call. Ignored for workspace API keys.
`approvalId`	No	Approval id from a prior needs_confirmation response, after the user has approved. Omit on the first call.
`experiment`	No	Measure it against the Ledger (expectation when it starts, verdict when it's done).
`valueScore`	No
`visibility`	No	Who can see it: PRIVATE (only the user), WORKSPACE (every member, the default), or SHARED (specific people, granted afterwards). Say 'make it private' → PRIVATE.
`description`	No	New description (≤5,000 chars).
`externalUrl`	No	Where the doing happens off-platform (URL); null clears.
`ownerPageId`	No	PERSON page id who owns the work; null clears.
`opportunityId`	Yes	The change's key (e.g. ACME-12) or id, from compass_opportunities_list.
`workflowPageId`	No	Workflow page to anchor to; null un-anchors.
`feasibilityScore`	No
`qualitativeNotes`	No	Free-form notes (≤20,000 chars) — replaces the current notes.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedOct 7, 2026

TDQS

A4.3/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and openWorldHint=false, so the write profile is covered. The description adds genuinely useful behavior beyond that: partial-update semantics ('fields you omit are untouched') and the confirmation round-trip. It stops short of noting that tags/notes are replaced rather than merged, which the schema covers instead.

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?

Front-loads the field list, then the constraints (partial update, sibling exclusion, id source, confirmation), with no filler. The single dense sentence is efficient, though slightly list-heavy.

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?

For an 18-parameter mutation with no output schema, the description covers partial-update behavior, id sourcing, the status-tool boundary, and the confirmation flow. Only the replacement-vs-merge nuance for tags/notes is left to the schema.

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?

Schema description coverage is 83%, so the schema already documents nearly every parameter. The description's field list largely mirrors the schema and adds little new syntax, though flagging ownerPageId as 'a PERSON page' is a helpful clarification. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 (corrects/edits) and resource (an opportunity's content) and enumerates the editable fields, so the scope is unambiguous. It explicitly distinguishes itself from compass_opportunities_set_status by declaring the lane is NOT handled here.

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?

Gives explicit routing: use compass_opportunities_set_status to move the lane, and get ids from compass_opportunities_list. It also prescribes the interaction protocol for the needs_confirmation response (say what you're changing and wait).

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

All ZeroWidth 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?