Oviond

Edit team member

update_user

Edit a team member — only include the fields you want to change

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`id`	Yes	User ID to edit (from list_users)
`role`	No	Role to assign (admin, clients, or readonly)
`clients`	No	Client IDs the user can access, from list_clients (for the "clients" and "readonly" roles)
`fullname`	No	Full name

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`data`	No	The team member as saved — id, fullname, role and their client scope.
`success`	Yes	True when the call succeeded. A failure comes back as an error result instead.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedSep 18, 2026

changedOutput schema / (root)

Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "$schema": "http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#",
+  "additionalProperties": false,
+  "properties": {
+    "data": {
+      "additionalProperties": {},
+      "description": "The team member as saved — id, fullname, role and their client scope.",
+      "type": "object"
+    },
+    "success": {
+      "description": "True when the call succeeded. A failure comes back as an error result instead.",
+      "type": "boolean"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "success"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}

First observedSep 18, 2026

TDQS

A3.9/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations signal that this is not read-only and not destructive, and the description adds the valuable behavioral trait that omitted fields remain unchanged. This partial-update semantic is not directly provided by the annotations or schema and is important for an agent to call the tool correctly.

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 a single concise sentence with no filler. It states the core purpose and the most important usage constraint immediately, making it easy for an agent to parse.

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?

Given the low complexity, full schema coverage, and presence of an output schema, the description is sufficient. The partial-update directive is the one non-obvious piece of context, and it is clearly included.

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 100%, so all four parameters already carry clear descriptions. The description's partial-update guidance complements the schema but does not add any parameter-specific meaning beyond what is already documented.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description uses a specific verb ('Edit') and resource ('a team member'), and adds the key nuance that only the included fields are changed. It clearly states what the tool does, though it does not explicitly differentiate itself from sibling tools like invite_user or update_client.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The instruction 'only include the fields you want to change' gives useful guidance on how to call the tool as a partial update. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool instead of invite_user, remove_user, or update_client, leaving that distinction to naming inference.

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

All Oviond tools Inspect

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

Need Help?