Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Replo

by app.replo.api
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Update project

update_project
DestructiveIdempotent

Update the supplied settings of a Replo project: name, time zone, currency, support email, or checkoutProvider. Changing checkoutProvider affects checkout on the project's sites after publication; Shopify checkout requires a connected store and Replo checkout requires payments onboarding. Publishing is a separate action.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameNo
currencyNoCurrency
timeZoneNo
projectIdYes
supportEmailNo
checkoutProviderNo
industryCategoryIdNoWhat the business sells or does: an industry category id from find_industry_categories. Null clears it.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed3 schema fields changed
    • removedInput schema / $schema
      Removed value: -"https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema"
    • changedInput schema / properties / industryCategoryId / anyOf
      Previous value: -[
-  {
-    "format": "uuid",
-    "pattern": "^([0-9a-fA-F]{8}-[0-9a-fA-F]{4}-[1-8][0-9a-fA-F]{3}-[89abAB][0-9a-fA-F]{3}-[0-9a-fA-F]{12}|00000000-0000-0000-0000-000000000000|ffffffff-ffff-ffff-ffff-ffffffffffff)$",
-    "type": "string"
-  },
-  {
-    "type": "null"
-  }
-]New value: +[
+  {
+    "format": "uuid",
+    "type": "string"
+  },
+  {
+    "type": "null"
+  }
+]
    • removedInput schema / properties / projectId / pattern
      Removed value: -"^([0-9a-fA-F]{8}-[0-9a-fA-F]{4}-[1-8][0-9a-fA-F]{3}-[89abAB][0-9a-fA-F]{3}-[0-9a-fA-F]{12}|00000000-0000-0000-0000-000000000000|ffffffff-ffff-ffff-ffff-ffffffffffff)$"
  2. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / industryCategoryId
      Added value: +{
+  "anyOf": [
+    {
+      "format": "uuid",
+      "pattern": "^([0-9a-fA-F]{8}-[0-9a-fA-F]{4}-[1-8][0-9a-fA-F]{3}-[89abAB][0-9a-fA-F]{3}-[0-9a-fA-F]{12}|00000000-0000-0000-0000-000000000000|ffffffff-ffff-ffff-ffff-ffffffffffff)$",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    {
+      "type": "null"
+    }
+  ],
+  "description": "What the business sells or does: an industry category id from find_industry_categories. Null clears it."
+}
  3. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedInput schema / $schema
      Previous value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"New value: +"https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema"
  4. First observed

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare destructive/idempotent/write, and the description adds real context beyond them: checkoutProvider changes propagate to the project's sites only after publication and depend on external setup. It does not explain what the destructiveHint risk actually is (e.g. whether nulls clear fields or omitted fields are preserved), so the risk surface is only partially disclosed.

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?

Three sentences, front-loaded with the field list, then the risk-bearing conditional, then the scope boundary. No filler and no repetition of the title.

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?

With seven parameters, no output schema, and a destructive write, the description covers the main fields and the highest-risk side effect. The gaps are the unmentioned industryCategoryId and no statement about partial-update semantics (what happens to fields not supplied), which an agent would want before calling.

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 coverage is only 29%, so the description must compensate; it names five of the seven parameters and explains the checkoutProvider enum's consequences, which is genuine added meaning. However it never mentions industryCategoryId (a settable field with null-clearing semantics documented only in the schema) or projectId, and adds no format guidance for currency/timeZone.

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?

Specific verb plus resource plus the exact set of mutable fields ('Update the supplied settings of a Replo project: name, time zone, currency, support email, or checkoutProvider'). It also explicitly separates itself from publishing, so an agent can distinguish it from publish_site without opening schemas.

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?

Gives concrete prerequisites for the risky branch (Shopify checkout requires a connected store; Replo checkout requires payments onboarding) and states 'Publishing is a separate action' as an exclusion. It stops short of naming an alternative tool for publishing or for project-level vs site-level config, which keeps it from a 5.

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

All Replo toolsInspect
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