Damper

Patch Context Section

patch_context_section

Apply stable-block operations with optimistic concurrency and immutable version snapshots.

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": {
      "projectId": "<projectId>",
      "section": "<section>",
      "ifVersion": "<ifVersion>"
    },
    "name": "patch_context_section"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`section`	Yes
`metadata`	No
`ifVersion`	Yes
`projectId`	Yes	Project ID. Use list_projects to find available project IDs.
`operations`	No

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`dashboardUrl`	No	Full dashboard URL of the affected resource

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedOct 30, 2026

TDQS

C2.7/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare the tool mutates but isn't destructive or idempotent. The description adds genuinely useful context beyond that: 'optimistic concurrency' and 'immutable version snapshots' explain the versioning model and why ifVersion is required. However, it omits what happens on a version mismatch, whether operations apply atomically, and batch behavior of the operations array.

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?

A single well-formed sentence with no wasted words, and the concurrency constraint is front-loaded. It is efficient but so terse that the density tips toward under-specification rather than clarity.

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?

The tool has an output schema and nested objects, but five parameters with 20% coverage and three competing sibling tools demand far more description. Nothing explains the supported operations, version-required workflow, or failure behavior. The single sentence leaves core operational knowledge undocumented.

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 20%, only projectId is documented in the schema, and the description adds no meaning for section, ifVersion, metadata, or the nested operations array with its three op variants. With five parameters including a complex nested union, the description fails to compensate for the low coverage.

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

Purpose3/5

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

The verb 'apply' plus the resource 'stable-block operations' is abstract jargon that never names the context section being patched or the block-level replace/insert/delete semantics visible in the schema. An agent cannot distinguish it confidently from siblings like update_context_section or upsert_context_block. Only the name 'patch_context_section' hints at scope.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

No when-to-use guidance and no mention of alternatives, despite siblings update_context_section, upsert_context_block, delete_context_section and preview_context_update that clearly compete. The reader must guess when patching is appropriate versus updating or upserting.

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

All Damper 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?