Skip to main content
Glama

AssetLab

by ca.assetlab
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Update project

update_project
DestructiveIdempotent

Update an existing project by ID. Requires projects:write scope.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYesProject ID
nameNoProject name
statusNoStatus label shown in the app's Status column and filter: planning, in-progress, on-hold, completed, cancelled, or your organization's own value. Defaults to planning. Whether the project is active or archived follows current_phase; status counts only when the phase has no Means setting.
end_dateNoEnd date (ISO 8601)
image_urlNoImage URL
start_dateNoStart date (ISO 8601)
descriptionNoDescription
project_codeNoProject code
project_typeNoProject type
budget_statusNoBudget status
current_phaseNoCurrent phase
health_statusNoHealth status
progress_statusNoProgress status
project_managerNoProject manager name
progress_percentageNoProgress percentage (0-100)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / status / description
      Previous value: -"Project status"New value: +"Status label shown in the app's Status column and filter: planning, in-progress, on-hold, completed, cancelled, or your organization's own value. Defaults to planning. Whether the project is active or archived follows current_phase; status counts only when the phase has no Means setting."
  2. Changed1 schema field changed
    • removedInput schema / properties / budget
      Removed value: -{
-  "description": "Total budget",
-  "minimum": 0,
-  "type": "number"
-}
  3. Changed3 schema fields changed
    • changedInput schema / $schema
      Previous value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"New value: +"https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema"
    • removedInput schema / additionalProperties
      Removed value: -false
    • addedInput schema / properties / id / pattern
      Added value: +"^([0-9a-fA-F]{8}-[0-9a-fA-F]{4}-[0-9a-fA-F]{4}-[0-9a-fA-F]{4}-[0-9a-fA-F]{12})$"
  4. Changed3 schema fields changed
    • changedInput schema / $schema
      Previous value: -"https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema"New value: +"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"
    • addedInput schema / additionalProperties
      Added value: +false
    • removedInput schema / properties / id / pattern
      Removed value: -"^([0-9a-fA-F]{8}-[0-9a-fA-F]{4}-[0-9a-fA-F]{4}-[0-9a-fA-F]{4}-[0-9a-fA-F]{12})$"
  5. Changed3 schema fields changed
    • changedInput schema / $schema
      Previous value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"New value: +"https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema"
    • removedInput schema / additionalProperties
      Removed value: -false
    • addedInput schema / properties / id / pattern
      Added value: +"^([0-9a-fA-F]{8}-[0-9a-fA-F]{4}-[0-9a-fA-F]{4}-[0-9a-fA-F]{4}-[0-9a-fA-F]{12})$"
  6. First observed

TDQS

B3.3/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the auth requirement (projects:write scope), but omits a critical behavioral detail for a 15-parameter update: whether unspecified fields are preserved or cleared (partial vs. full replacement).

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 filler; the identity/action is front-loaded and the scope requirement follows. Nothing redundant or padded.

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?

For a destructive, idempotent 15-parameter mutation, annotations and the fully documented schema cover most needs, and no output schema exists to explain. However, the description never clarifies update semantics (merge vs. replace) or the consequences of the destructiveHint, which an agent needs to call this safely.

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 100%, so all 15 parameters are already documented, including the enum-constrained status, project_type, budget_status, health_status, and progress_status fields. The description adds no parameter-level meaning beyond what the schema provides, which is the expected baseline when the schema does the heavy lifting.

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?

States a specific verb+resource ('Update an existing project') and the identifier ('by ID'), so the action is unambiguous. It does not differentiate from the many sibling update_* tools (e.g. update_project_phase, update_project_task) or explain what distinguishes this top-level project update, so it falls short of a 5.

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 description names the required scope ('Requires projects:write scope'), which is a useful precondition, but gives no when-to-use guidance, no exclusions, and does not point to any alternative (e.g. bulk_update for multiple projects). Usage is left entirely to inference.

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

All AssetLab toolsInspect
Try in Browser
Pay for results, not tokens.Fund a bounty. Let AI agents compete and collaborate to solve your problems.agentbounties.appAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources