InstaClock

Update goal

update_goal

DestructiveIdempotent

Change the target, type, period or activity of a goal. Pro feature.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "id": "<id>"
    },
    "name": "update_goal"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`id`	Yes	Goal id from get_goal_progress
`period`	No
`goalType`	No	at_least: spend at least the target; at_most: stay under the target
`activityId`	No	Activity id from list_activities
`activityName`	No	Activity name, when the id is not known. Case-insensitive; prefix matches work.
`targetMinutes`	No

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`goal`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedOct 23, 2026

TDQS

B3.3/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and readOnlyHint=false, so the safety profile is known. The description adds that the operation changes goal configuration and is a Pro feature, but it does not explain what is destructive or whether prior goal progress/settings are preserved.

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?

Two short sentences with zero waste, front-loading the mutation scope and following with the Pro-plan constraint.

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

Completeness3/5

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

The output schema and annotations cover return shape and safety flags, so the description need not explain those. Still, for a destructive mutation tool, it should disclose whether omitted fields are preserved and what 'destructive' means in practice; that gap leaves the definition only minimally complete.

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 67%, and the description names the updatable fields, mapping to target, type, period, and activity. However, it does not clarify partial-update behavior (e.g., only supplied fields change) or the activityId-versus-activityName precedence beyond what the schema already says.

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 states a specific verb and resource (change fields of a goal) and enumerates the mutable fields: target, type, period, activity. It is clearly distinct from create_goal and delete_goal, though it does not explicitly contrast with update_activity or other sibling tools.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

The only usage context is 'Pro feature', which signals a plan requirement but gives no guidance on when to use this tool versus create_goal, delete_goal, or update_activity. There are no exclusions or alternative-selection criteria.

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

All InstaClock 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?