Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

fnlowl

by com.fnlowl
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Update ai context

update_ai_context
Destructive

Change the AI context: the about text, design direction, value props, pricing tiers and testimonials that every AI-personalised lead magnet is generated from. Changes apply to generations from then on; lead magnets already sent are not rewritten. Only the fields sent are changed. It holds what the site actually says, so testimonials and prices come from the owner. The AI context belongs to the whole account and is shared by every website on it, so it cannot be changed from a connection limited to one website.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "update_ai_context"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
aboutNo
projectNoA project id from list_projects. Runs this call in that project instead of the connection default.
valuePropsNo
pricingTiersNo
testimonialsNo
designDirectionNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Goes well beyond the destructiveHint=true annotation, disclosing that sent lead magnets are not retroactively rewritten, that it behaves as a partial update on only the supplied fields, that it is account-wide and shared across all websites, and that it cannot be called from a single-website connection. These are exactly the side-effect and permission facts an agent needs before invoking a destructive mutation.

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?

Front-loaded with what changes first, then the temporal scoping, then partial-update semantics, then account-wide/permission caveats — a logical order. Five dense sentences with little waste, though the 'it holds what the site actually says' sentence is somewhat redundant with the field enumeration.

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 destructive, multi-field mutation with no output schema and only 17% schema coverage, the description supplies the essential behavioral and scoping facts an agent needs. The remaining gap is format guidance for the structured pricing/testimonial arrays, which is left entirely to the schema.

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 17% across 6 params, so the description must compensate. It names five of the six fields (about, design direction, value props, pricing tiers, testimonials), which helps, but adds no format or structure detail for the pricingTiers and testimonials object arrays, and does not address the project parameter (that one is documented in-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?

States a specific verb (Change) plus the resource (the AI context) and enumerates exactly which fields it holds: about text, design direction, value props, pricing tiers, testimonials. This lets an agent distinguish it from the sibling read_ai_context and update_brand without opening a schema.

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?

Gives clear operating context: changes are forward-only ('lead magnets already sent are not rewritten') and it is a partial update ('only the fields sent are changed'), plus a real constraint about account-scoped connections. It stops short of explicitly naming read_ai_context as the inspection counterpart, so the alternative is only implied.

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

All fnlowl toolsInspect
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