RetailHardHat

Update Project

update_project

Destructive

Use this when working with RetailHardHat projects records in the connected organization. Update allowed fields of project. No change occurs until a human approves the exact request in Settings > MCP and execute_approved_action is called. MCP approval requirements are configurable by the organization administrator; business workflow approvals always apply.

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": {
      "id": "<id>",
      "data": "<data>"
    },
    "name": "update_project"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`id`	Yes
`data`	Yes

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`data`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedOct 27, 2026

TDQS

B3.3/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare destructive=true, non-idempotent, and non-readonly, but the description adds crucial context: changes are staged and require human approval in Settings > MCP before execute_approved_action executes them. This approval gating is a meaningful behavioral trait not captured by annotations.

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?

The description is concise and mostly front-loaded: the first sentence scopes the tool, the second states the action, and the remaining sentences cover approval mechanics. Some phrasing, such as 'working with RetailHardHat projects records in the connected organization,' is boilerplate but not excessive.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness2/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

An output schema exists and annotations cover safety traits, but the input schema is a complex nested object with zero description coverage. The description never explains the id parameter or the fields inside data, leaving a significant gap for an agent trying to invoke the tool correctly.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters2/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description carries the full burden for explaining the two top-level parameters and the nested data object. It only says 'update allowed fields' and never identifies which fields are allowed or explains the meaning of id, data, or nested properties.

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 clearly states the verb and resource: 'Update allowed fields of project.' It is specific enough to distinguish this from sibling tools like update_project_task or update_project_note, though it does not name any alternatives or explain how it differs from other generic update tools.

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?

It gives implied usage ('when working with RetailHardHat projects records') and important approval workflow guidance, including that no change occurs until a human approves and execute_approved_action is called. However, it does not say when to use this tool versus other update tools or list any exclusions.

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

All RetailHardHat 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?