Perkadoo

Update a giveaway

update_giveaway

DestructiveIdempotent

Change a giveaway before it's drawn. Changing its dates, draw, prizes, rules or bonus entries clears its approval and returns it to draft; pause a live giveaway first. Headline, description, image and color can change any time.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "giveawayId": "<giveawayId>"
    },
    "name": "update_giveaway"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`name`	No	The giveaway's name, shown as its title.
`rules`	No	The official rules. A person approves them before the giveaway goes live.
`prizes`	No	One prize per place for placed draws; otherwise the first prize goes to every winner.
`opensAt`	No	When entries open, as an ISO 8601 time.
`closesAt`	No	When entries close, as an ISO 8601 time. Must be after opensAt.
`language`	No	The language the entry page, results page and site banner speak to entrants: en or es.
`timezone`	No	The time zone the official rules and dashboard use, e.g. America/New_York.
`entryPage`	No	The hosted entry page's headline, description, image, brand color and bonuses.
`drawMethod`	No	single: one winner. multiple: equal winners. placed: 1st, 2nd, 3rd…
`giveawayId`	Yes	Giveaway ID. It is also the giveaway's campaign ID for approval and status.
`winnerCount`	No	How many winners to draw.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedNov 1, 2026

changedInput schema / properties / entryPage / description

Previous value: -"The hosted entry page's headline, description, image, brand colour and bonuses."New value: +"The hosted entry page's headline, description, image, brand color and bonuses."

Changed1 schema field changedOct 22, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / language

Added value: +{
+  "description": "The language the entry page, results page and site banner speak to entrants: en or es.",
+  "enum": [
+    "en",
+    "es"
+  ],
+  "type": "string"
+}

First observedOct 21, 2026

TDQS

A4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

The annotations flag destructiveHint=true, but the description is what explains the actual damage: edits to dates, draw, prizes, rules or bonus entries clear approval and revert the giveaway to draft. That is a non-obvious state transition the annotations cannot convey. Minor gap: name, language and timezone are not classified into either the reset or safe group, leaving their side effects unstated.

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?

Two sentences, both front-loaded with the consequence before the detail. No filler, and the critical warning sits in the first sentence where an agent will read it.

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 an 11-parameter nested mutation tool with no output schema, the description covers the two things an agent most needs: the approval-reset side effect and the editability tiers. It stops short of complete, since unlisted parameters and partial-update semantics (are omitted fields left untouched?) are left ambiguous.

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 100%, so the schema already carries the field-level documentation and the baseline is 3. The description does add semantic grouping by explaining which parameters trigger an approval reset versus which are freely editable, but it never resolves the fields it omits (name, language, timezone), so the added value is partial.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource ("Change a giveaway") and pins down scope with "before it's drawn," which separates it from create_giveaway and from draw_winners. It never names a sibling tool outright, so the differentiation is inferred from timing rather than stated.

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?

"Pause a live giveaway first" is an explicit precondition, and the description draws a clear line between edits that are safe at any time versus edits that reset approval. It lacks any pointer to get_giveaway or list_giveaways for inspecting the current state before editing, which would have made it a 5.

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

All Perkadoo 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?