Skip to main content
Glama

Fabrement

Update Contact Form 7 form

fabrement-update-cf7-form

Update a Contact Form 7 form — send only what changes. template REPLACES the form body whole and re-derives the mail from the tags in it, so edit the markup get-cf7-form returns rather than sending a fragment: what you leave out is gone. messages patches only the keys sent ("" resets one to the default). get-cf7-form first. Rules: get-skill-doc {id:"forms-contract"} — read it before the first call.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
titleNoNew form title (omit to keep).
formIdYesForm id from list-forms.
subjectNoNotification email subject line.
messagesNoCF7 "Messages" tab as {key: text} — mail_sent_ok, validation_error, invalid_required, invalid_email, … (get-cf7-form lists every key with its current text and default). Only the keys sent change; "" resets one to the default; unknown keys are refused.
templateNoThe FULL CF7 form markup, replacing what is there — get-cf7-form returns the current one to edit. Same rules as create-cf7-form: your HTML around CF7 [tags], [submit "…"] for the button, a reserved control name (name, search, author, page, …) refused rather than renamed, at most 40 controls.
recipientNoEmail address the submissions are sent to.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
formYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4.9/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

With no annotations, the description fully carries the behavioral burden and does so well: it discloses that template REPLACES the body whole (destructive — 'what you leave out is gone'), that messages patches only sent keys, that empty string resets a key to default, and that unknown keys are refused. These are the exact semantics an agent needs to avoid data loss.

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?

Front-loaded with the action and default behavior, then the two tricky fields, then prerequisites. Every clause earns its place and there is no filler.

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 mutation tool with six params and no annotations, the description covers merge/replace semantics, prerequisites, and hard constraints (reserved control names, 40-control cap, unknown-key refusal). An output schema exists, so return values need no explanation, making this complete.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3, but the description adds real meaning beyond the schema — the whole-replacement nature of template and the patch/reset semantics of messages reinforce and clarify the field-level docs. It does not add usage detail for title/subject/recipient, keeping it just below top.

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 (Update) and resource (Contact Form 7 form) and immediately differentiates scope with 'send only what changes', which separates it from create-cf7-form and delete-cf7-form. An agent can identify the tool's operation without opening the schema.

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: call get-cf7-form first to fetch current markup, and read the forms-contract skill doc before the first call. It also names the precondition for correct use (edit the returned markup rather than send a fragment), so when and how to invoke it is clear.

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

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources