Simpler.Asia

studio_project_update

Rename a project, change its status, or replace its thumbnail on a project you own — send thumbnail_data_url, never thumbnail_key, which is server-owned and computed by this door the same way studio_project_create does. status here is UI-summary-only by design: it never gates render or generation, which are tracked separately by the export job row and the composition document's own scene status. Free. NOT_FOUND when the id is outside your scope — list first with studio_project_list.

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": "studio_project_update"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`id`	Yes	The studio project id to update (studio_project_list shows them).
`name`	No
`status`	No
`thumbnail_key`	No
`thumbnail_data_url`	No	Data URL (data:image/...) of the project thumbnail — the door externalizes it into a content-addressed R2 key through the media hygiene kit (magic bytes decide the type; SVG refuses). Never send thumbnail_key directly; it is server-owned and computed from this field. Omit to leave the thumbnail unset/unchanged.
`expected_updated_at`	No	Optional compare-and-set guard: the updated_at you last read. Mismatch returns CONFLICT with the current value.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedOct 23, 2026

TDQS

A4.3/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Adds real context annotations cannot convey: the operation is free, NOT_FOUND means the id is out of scope, status is deliberately UI-summary-only and never gates render/generation (which live in the export job row and composition doc), and thumbnail keys are server-computed. It does not address idempotency despite the annotation declaring idempotentHint=false, which would have been a useful clarification for repeated thumbnail replacement.

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?

The three actions are front-loaded and every clause carries information (thumbnail rule, status meaning, cost, error path). It is delivered as one long em-dash-chained sentence, which is dense but not padded.

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 a mutation tool with no output schema, the description covers scope, cost, error semantics, and the two trap parameters. It leaves partial-update behavior (what happens to omitted fields) and the conflict path on expected_updated_at to inference and schema respectively.

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 coverage is only 50%, and the description closes the most dangerous gap: thumbnail_key is an accepted schema field that must never be sent, thumbnail_data_url must be used instead and is externalized via the media hygiene kit. It also disambiguates the overloaded 'status' field. It says nothing about expected_updated_at or the rename/name semantics, leaving those to 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?

Names three concrete operations (rename, change status, replace thumbnail) on a specific resource and scopes it with 'on a project you own'. It is immediately distinguishable from studio_project_create, studio_project_read, and studio_project_delete in the sibling list.

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?

Tells the agent to list first with studio_project_list before calling, and pre-empts the NOT_FOUND case. It does not explicitly frame when to use this versus reading or deleting a project, but for an update tool that is largely self-evident.

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

All Simpler.Asia 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?