Skip to main content
Glama

GrowSurf

Update Program

growsurf_update_campaign
DestructiveIdempotent

Update your GrowSurf program's (campaign's) identity and lifecycle: name, companyName, companyLogoImageUrl, and status (set IN_PROGRESS to publish/resume the program, COMPLETE to end it). Only the fields you send are changed. type, urlId, and currencyISO are immutable (currency is chosen once at program creation), so this tool does not accept them. Editor-tab config (design, emails, options, installation) is edited with the dedicated config sub-resource tools, not here. Targets campaignId if you pass it, otherwise GROWSURF_CAMPAIGN_ID.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameNo
statusNoLifecycle transition. IN_PROGRESS publishes/resumes the program; COMPLETE ends it. These are the only accepted targets — DRAFT/PENDING/CANCELLED are rejected by the API.
campaignIdYesTarget program id for this call: the `id` returned by `growsurf_list_campaigns`, not the program name or a share URL. Defaults to GROWSURF_CAMPAIGN_ID when omitted. Program IDs also identify newly created programs without restarting the server.
companyNameNo
companyLogoImageUrlNo

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / campaignId / description
      Previous value: -"Target program (campaign) id for this call. Defaults to GROWSURF_CAMPAIGN_ID when omitted. Program IDs also identify newly created programs without restarting the server."New value: +"Target program id for this call: the `id` returned by `growsurf_list_campaigns`, not the program name or a share URL. Defaults to GROWSURF_CAMPAIGN_ID when omitted. Program IDs also identify newly created programs without restarting the server."
  2. Changed5 schema fields changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / companyLogoImageUrl / minLength
      Added value: +1
    • changedInput schema / properties / companyLogoImageUrl / type
      Previous value: -"string"New value: +[
      +  "string",
      +  "null"
      +]
    • addedInput schema / properties / companyName / minLength
      Added value: +1
    • changedInput schema / properties / companyName / type
      Previous value: -"string"New value: +[
      +  "string",
      +  "null"
      +]
    • addedInput schema / properties / name / minLength
      Added value: +1
  3. First observed

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Beyond the annotations (destructive=true, idempotent=true, openWorldHint=true) it discloses partial-update semantics ('only the fields you send are changed'), immutability of type/urlId/currencyISO, and which status targets the API rejects (DRAFT/PENDING/CANCELLED). It does not spell out permission requirements or what happens to the live program when status flips to COMPLETE, which is the main remaining risk gap for a destructive operation.

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 purpose, then exclusions, then targeting; nearly every clause carries information. It is a dense single paragraph with semicolon chaining, which is slightly harder to scan than a short bulleted structure would be, but nothing is genuinely redundant.

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 5-parameter mutation tool with an output schema, the definition covers targeting, partial-update semantics, immutable fields, lifecycle transitions, and sibling routing. Return values need not be described because an output schema exists.

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 coverage is 40%, and the description compensates partly: it explains the status lifecycle values and the campaignId targeting/fallback convention and clarifies that immutable properties are not accepted (matching additionalProperties=false). However, name, companyName, and companyLogoImageUrl are only named, with no added meaning about formats, URL validity, or null-clearing behavior.

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 names a specific verb (update) and enumerates exactly the mutable surface: name, companyName, companyLogoImageUrl, and status. It explicitly excludes type, urlId, currencyISO and editor-tab config, which separates it cleanly from the many growsurf_update_campaign_* 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?

It states when to use this tool versus the dedicated config sub-resource tools ('design, emails, options, installation ... not here') and when to change status (IN_PROGRESS to publish/resume, COMPLETE to end). It also states the campaignId fallback rule, so target selection is unambiguous.

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.