Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Mondovo

by com.mondovo.app
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Change a data source's field mapping

update_data_source_mapping
Idempotent

Replace the field mapping on a connected data source — for when the wrong field shows in a section (a blank price, the wrong heading). field_mapping REPLACES the old one, so include every row to keep; {} clears it. row_descriptor says which fields identify one item (idField and labelField required; imageField, linkField, subtitleField optional). The address, schedule and section are untouched. Republish or sync for it to show.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
site_idYesThe site, from list_sites
user_goalNoOptional: the user's goal behind this call, in one short sentence of plain words (e.g. "add a page so customers can book tables"). No names, emails or other personal details.
field_mappingYes{ "<source field>": "<section field>" }; source keys may be dot-paths, targets are flat field names
data_source_idYesThe source, from list_data_sources
row_descriptorNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / user_goal
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Optional: the user's goal behind this call, in one short sentence of plain words (e.g. \"add a page so customers can book tables\"). No names, emails or other personal details.",
+  "type": "string"
+}
  2. First observed

TDQS

A4.7/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Goes well beyond the annotations: it discloses that field_mapping REPLACES rather than merges, that {} clears the mapping, and that address, schedule and section are left untouched. That replacement semantics is exactly the kind of behavior the non-destructive annotation would otherwise hide.

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?

Tight and front-loaded: the action, the trigger, the replacement caveat, the nested-field rules, and the scope/follow-up all arrive in order with 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?

With no output schema and a nested object parameter, the description still covers replacement behavior, nested field requirements, what is not modified, and the post-call step needed for the change to appear. 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 already 80%, yet the description still adds real meaning: the destructive replace semantics of field_mapping and the required vs optional split inside row_descriptor (idField/labelField required; imageField, linkField, subtitleField optional).

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 and resource ('Replace the field mapping on a connected data source') and adds the user-visible symptom that motivates it (blank price, wrong heading). This clearly separates it from connect_data_source and test_data_source_connection.

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 a concrete when-to-use trigger ('when the wrong field shows in a section') and a required follow-up ('Republish or sync for it to show'). It does not name an alternative tool or an explicit when-not condition, which keeps it just below the top.

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

All Mondovo 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