Autario Data Analytics Platform

update_chart

Idempotent

Update an existing chart you own. Only the API key that created the chart can update it. Use this to modify the Plotly spec, title, or insight of a previously published chart.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`title`	No	Updated chart title
`insight`	No	Updated insight text with verified numbers
`chart_id`	Yes	The chart ID or slug returned by publish_chart
`narration`	No	Updated analysis description
`plotly_spec`	Yes	Updated Plotly specification with traces and layout

TDQS

A4.5/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations indicate mutation (readOnlyHint=false) and non-destructive (destructiveHint=false). Description adds ownership and API key constraint, which is valuable beyond annotations. No contradictions.

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 sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose, no unnecessary words. Efficient and clear.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a simple update tool with no output schema, the description is complete: it covers purpose, constraints, and what can be modified. No missing critical information.

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 has 100% coverage with descriptions for all parameters. Description reiterates that Plotly spec, title, or insight can be modified, but adds minimal new meaning beyond 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?

Clearly states it updates an existing chart, specifies ownership constraint, and lists modifiable aspects (Plotly spec, title, insight). Distinguishes from siblings like publish_chart and get_chart.

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?

Explicitly says to use for updating a chart you own, with the constraint that only the creating API key can update. Does not explicitly list when not to use, but context with sibling tools implies differentiation.

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

All Autario Data Analytics Platform tools Inspect

Try in Browser

RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A3.9/5.0

Disambiguation4/5

Most tools are strongly domain-specific with clear boundaries, especially the 360 reports and dataset/chart CRUD tools. Some overlap exists around driver analysis (find_drivers, what_matters, decompose_drivers) and dataset discovery (search_datasets, discover_by_topic, list_indicators), but the descriptions make the intended use cases mostly distinguishable.

Naming Consistency4/5

The vast majority of tools follow a clear snake_case verb_noun or get_noun pattern, e.g. list_connectors, refresh_connector, query_dataset, delete_dataset. Minor deviations such as calculate, describe, bubble_or_not, what_matters, and the 360-style report names keep it from being perfectly uniform.

Tool Count2/5

48 tools is far beyond the 3-15 range and even beyond the 25-tool threshold for a heavy surface. The platform is broad and the tools are organized into domains, but the sheer number creates a high selection burden for an agent and suggests the server is trying to cover too many workflows in one toolset.

Completeness4/5

The toolset covers dataset lifecycle, chart lifecycle, data discovery, querying, statistics, app context, connectors, and admin reports remarkably well. Notable gaps are the lack of a delete_chart tool and no row-level update/delete for datasets, but agents can generally work around these or treat them as intentional platform constraints.

Resources

Need Help?