Skip to main content
Glama

Update style fields

update_style_fields
Destructive

Hand-edit a style's analyzed fields after reviewing them — e.g. tighten the art_style wording or adjust the director_style pacing rules.

`fields` is a PATCH, merged over what the style already has: send only the
keys you are changing and leave the rest out — there is no need to read
the whole dict back with get_style and round-trip it. Pass {key: null} to
delete a user-added key (the well-known art_style / narrative_style /
director_style / script_prompt cannot be deleted, only rewritten, and
cannot be set empty). Editing fields does NOT trigger re-analysis, so your
edits stick.

Real media is switched by the literal `@real-media` tag inside
director_style's prose: add the tag plus prose describing when/how/how
much real media appears to turn it on; remove the tag (or its passage) to
turn it off.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
fieldsYesSparse patch of style fields, shaped {key: {"value": str, "applies_to": [...]}} — send ONLY the keys you are changing; unlisted keys keep their current value
style_idYesStyle ID, as returned by create_style or list_styles

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / fields / description
      Previous value: -"FULL flat dict of analyzed fields to write, shaped {key: {\"value\": str, \"applies_to\": [...]}} — fetch with get_style, modify, send the whole dict back"New value: +"Sparse patch of style fields, shaped {key: {\"value\": str, \"applies_to\": [...]}} — send ONLY the keys you are changing; unlisted keys keep their current value"
  2. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / fields / description
      Added value: +"FULL flat dict of analyzed fields to write, shaped {key: {\"value\": str, \"applies_to\": [...]}} — fetch with get_style, modify, send the whole dict back"
    • addedInput schema / properties / style_id / description
      Added value: +"Style ID, as returned by create_style or list_styles"
  3. First observed

TDQS

A4.7/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the destructiveHint annotation, the description discloses critical behavior: PATCH-merge semantics, deletion via {key: null}, restrictions on well-known keys, the fact that edits do NOT trigger re-analysis, and the special @real-media tag behavior. This is rich, non-obvious context that an agent needs before invoking the tool.

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?

The description is longer than average but every sentence earns its place. It front-loads the core purpose, then explains patch semantics, deletion rules, re-analysis behavior, and the real-media tag without redundancy. The structure is logical and scannable.

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 destructive, nested-object tool with no output schema, the description covers everything needed to call it correctly: required arguments, how to shape fields, what can and cannot be updated, deletion behavior, and the effect on re-analysis. Nothing essential is missing.

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 meaningful semantics beyond the schema: it explains the PATCH merge model, that unlisted keys are preserved, that null deletes user-added keys, and that well-known keys cannot be empty. This materially helps an agent construct valid arguments.

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?

The description opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Hand-edit a style's analyzed fields after reviewing them.' It names concrete examples (art_style wording, director_style pacing rules) that distinguish it from sibling tools like update_style_references or analyze_style. The purpose is unmistakable.

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?

The description gives clear practical guidance: use this only for manual edits to analyzed fields, send only changed keys, and avoid round-tripping via get_style. It also warns that edits do NOT trigger re-analysis. It does not explicitly name alternatives such as analyze_style for re-analysis or update_style_references for reference fields, but the usage context is strong.

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