nolag_update_actor
Update an actor
Input Schema
TableJSON Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| name | No | New actor name | |
| actorId | Yes | Actor ID | |
| isActive | No | Whether the actor is active | |
| description | No | New actor description |
NoLag MCP
Schema Changelog
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
- First observed
TDQS
C2.6/5.0
Behavior2/5
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
The description only says 'Update an actor', which implies a write operation. It does not disclose partial vs full replacement semantics, side effects, required permissions, or response behavior. With no annotations, this leaves the agent with minimal safety or side-effect insight.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Conciseness2/5
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The three-word phrase is extremely brief but is under-specified for a tool with four parameters and update semantics. It resembles under-specification rather than purposeful concision, lacking any structural clarity or elaboration.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Completeness1/5
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Given four parameters, no annotations, no output schema, and a mutation operation, the description is grossly inadequate. It does not explain update semantics, return values, or usage context, leaving the agent unguided for correct invocation.
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?
Input schema covers 100% of parameters with descriptions, so baseline is 3. The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, not explaining how parameters interact or update behavior.
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 uses a specific verb ('update') and resource ('actor'), clearly stating the operation. It distinguishes from create/get/list/delete actor tools, though it does not add scope details that differentiate it further from other update_* 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?
No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like set_actor_scope or update_app. There are no context cues, prerequisites, or exclusions mentioned.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.