Skip to main content
Glama

Revdoku

by com.revdoku

Bucket Update

bucket_update

Update bucket title, description, metadata, or the affirmative allow_search_indexing setting. Public permanent websites default to searchable; protected and preview websites are locked off. Configure form instances through metadata.publication_forms: Free plans use unchanged templates and paid plans may customize fields/copy. A page loads only the form type selected by its first valid {{REVDOKU_FORM:name}} or {{REVDOKU_FORM}} macro; without a macro it loads the first configured hosted form. Form changes are drafts until publish/republish.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
titleNoHuman-readable title for the bucket or website publication.
metadataNoOptional JSON metadata stored with the bucket. Use publication_forms to configure Revdoku's built-in forms.
bucket_idYesRevdoku bucket id returned by bucket_list or bucket_get, for example bkt_...
descriptionNoOptional human-readable description for the bucket or website publication.
allow_search_indexingNoAllow search engines to index this public website. Public permanent websites default to true. Set false to add Revdoku noindex controls. Protected websites and previews are locked off.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
bucketYes
guidanceNo

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

The description adds valuable behavioral context beyond the annotations: search-indexing defaults for public vs. protected/preview websites, plan-based customization limits, macro resolution behavior, and 'Form changes are drafts until publish/republish.' These are non-obvious side effects an agent needs to know. No contradiction with annotations exists.

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 dense but every sentence earns its place: it front-loads the core update scope, then explains the search-indexing default, form customization rules, macro selection behavior, and draft semantics. It is appropriately sized for a tool with such a complex nested schema.

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?

Given the large nested schema and output schema, the description covers the critical operational context: what changes are allowed, plan restrictions, form selection behavior, and publish requirements. It could explicitly mention that title/description updates apply immediately versus form drafts, but the existing guidance is strong and the schema fills structural details.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3, but the description adds meaningful semantics: the allow_search_indexing default/locked-off behavior and the publication_forms template/customization rules. It makes the nested metadata behavior more actionable without relying on the schema alone.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Update bucket title, description, metadata, or the affirmative allow_search_indexing setting.' This clearly names the mutable fields and distinguishes the tool from siblings like bucket_create or bucket_publish. The additional form-configuration detail reinforces what the update operation covers.

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?

The description provides clear context about what can be updated, including plan constraints and the drafting behavior of form changes. It implies usage for modifying an existing bucket's configuration, and it tells the agent that form changes require publish/republish to take effect. It does not explicitly enumerate alternatives or exclusions, but the context is sufficient and not misleading.

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

All Revdoku toolsInspect
Try in Browser
RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Disambiguation4/5

Most tools have clearly distinct purposes, but a few overlaps exist: bucket_file_move and bucket_file_rename both handle same-bucket renames/moves, and bucket_file_reorganize overlaps with copy/move operations. The detailed descriptions help clarify, but the boundaries aren't always obvious.

Naming Consistency4/5

The naming follows predictable patterns: bucket_<verb> for bucket-level actions, bucket_file_<verb> for file operations, bucket_publication_<verb> for publications, and website_preview_* for previews. Minor deviations like bucket_create_from_template, bucket_set_public_slug, and bucket_update_publication_access deviate slightly but remain readable.

Tool Count2/5

At 42 tools, the server is overweight for its scope. While the platform is feature-rich, many tools are narrowly specialized (e.g., bucket_publication_leads, bucket_lock_visibility_changes) and some are redundant (file_move vs file_rename vs file_reorganize), making the surface larger than necessary for an MCP server.

Completeness3/5

The tool set covers the full bucket lifecycle and most file operations, but there is no direct file delete tool (only via delete_missing in write_many or cross-bucket move soft-delete) and binary uploads are explicitly delegated to the CLI/REST. These are notable gaps for a complete file management workflow.

Resources