WebinarStack

Update Interaction

webinarstack.webinars.interactions_update

Idempotent

Replace all fields on an existing poll or CTA interaction on a tenant-owned webinar. NOTE: This is a REPLACE-not-merge operation — omitted type-specific fields reset to their defaults. To change one field, call interactions_get first to retrieve the current values, then resend the full body with your change applied. The type discriminator (cta|poll) is immutable after creation — attempting to change it returns VALIDATION_ERROR; create a new interaction with the desired type instead.

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": {
      "interactionId": "<interactionId>",
      "webinarId": "<webinarId>",
      "type": "<type>",
      "appearsAtSeconds": "<appearsAtSeconds>",
      "endsAtSeconds": "<endsAtSeconds>",
      "headline": "<headline>"
    },
    "name": "webinarstack.webinars.interactions_update"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`type`	Yes
`options`	No
`headline`	Yes
`iconName`	No
`imageUrl`	No
`timeline`	No
`buttonUrl`	No
`webinarId`	Yes
`choiceMode`	No		single
`buttonColor`	No
`buttonLabel`	No
`description`	No
`optionSpecs`	No
`internalName`	No
`countdownMode`	No
`endsAtSeconds`	Yes
`interactionId`	Yes	ID of the interaction to update
`buttonTextColor`	No
`appearsAtSeconds`	Yes
`countdownSeconds`	No
`aggregateMinVotes`	No
`resultsDisplayMode`	No		session
`customAggregatePercentages`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedNov 10, 2026

TDQS

A4/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already cover the safety profile (readOnlyHint=false, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false). The description adds real behavioral value beyond that by disclosing the replace-not-merge contract, that omitted type-specific fields reset to defaults, and that a type change yields VALIDATION_ERROR. It stops short of permissions/tenant auth requirements or any side effects on existing poll votes, which keeps it out of the top band.

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?

Four sentences, front-loaded with the operation and its most dangerous consequence, then the recovery procedure, then the immutable-field rule. No filler and no repetition of schema content.

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 high-risk semantics (destructive replace, immutable discriminator) are covered well, which is the most important part. But for a 23-parameter, low-coverage, no-output-schema tool, the type-specific field grouping and validation constraints remain unexplained, leaving a meaningful gap for correct invocation.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters2/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

With 23 parameters and only 4% schema description coverage, the description carries nearly the full burden and does not meet it. It explains the reset-on-omit rule and the immutability of `type`, but never distinguishes which fields are poll-specific (options, optionSpecs, choiceMode, aggregateMinVotes, customAggregatePercentages, resultsDisplayMode) versus CTA-specific (buttonLabel, buttonUrl, buttonColor, iconName, imageUrl), so an agent cannot infer which fields must be resent to avoid silent data loss.

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?

States a specific verb (replace all fields) and resource (an existing poll or CTA interaction on a tenant-owned webinar), plus the ownership scope. It is clearly separable from interactions_create, interactions_get, and interactions_delete among the siblings.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

Explicitly routes the agent: to change one field, call interactions_get first and resend the full body; to change the type, create a new interaction instead. It names both the read alternative and the create alternative with the condition that selects each.

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

All WebinarStack 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?