Viral Manager

update_assignment

Idempotent

Update an assignment: change its production status, due date, the note/brief for the creator, or add/remove tags. Approving or refusing notifies the creator by push and requires a submitted video ('sent' status or at least one upload); 'sent' itself is set by the creator when they submit and cannot be set here.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`status`	No	New status, or 'keep' to leave unchanged	keep
`add_tags`	No	Tags to add to the assignment
`due_date`	No	New due date YYYY-MM-DD, empty = unchanged
`admin_note`	No	New note/brief for the creator, empty = unchanged
`remove_tags`	No	Tags to remove from the assignment
`assignment_id`	Yes	Assignment id

TDQS

A4.6/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the annotations, the description discloses that approving/refusing triggers a push notification to the creator, requires a submitted video, and that 'sent' is reserved for the creator. These are meaningful side effects and preconditions not inferable from readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, or destructiveHint.

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 carry the full payload: the first states what can be changed, the second explains the critical constraints. No filler, and the most decision-relevant caveat is placed prominently.

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?

The description covers the tool's scope, side effects, and preconditions despite the absence of an output schema. It could be slightly more explicit about what the API returns or whether partial updates are atomic, but nothing essential to correct invocation is missing.

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 coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds value by clarifying that the status enum includes an unsettable value, that approving/refusing has notification side effects, and that the admin_note is the creator-facing brief. This exceeds the schema's isolated parameter descriptions.

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 names a specific action ('Update an assignment') and enumerates the exact mutable fields: production status, due date, note/brief, and tags. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like create_assignment, delete_assignment, or move_assignment_to_folder.

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 gives clear operational context: approving or refusing is only allowed when a video is submitted, and 'sent' cannot be set from this tool. It does not explicitly name alternative tools, but the update-focused phrasing and status constraints provide enough guidance for selecting and safely using this tool.

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

All Viral Manager tools Inspect

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

A3.9/5.0

Disambiguation4/5

Each tool has a distinct target resource/action, and the descriptions are unusually explicit about differences (e.g., 'Distinct from the watchlist', 'Separate list from list_tags'). A few pairs are still easy to confuse without careful reading: delete_folder vs delete_folders differ only by singular/plural, and the three download-URL tools (get_post_download_url, get_asset_download_url, get_my_account_post_download_url) plus the category/tag families require attention to pick correctly.

Naming Consistency4/5

The snake_case verb_noun pattern is followed consistently throughout (list_*, get_*, create_*, update_*, delete_*, set_*, tag_*). Minor deviations: archive_folder and archive_my_accounts also perform restore despite their names, delete_folder/delete_folders split one operation by cardinality, and tag_posts/tag_my_account use a different verb style than the set_* family for metadata mutations.

Tool Count2/5

At 56 tools, this far exceeds the 25+ threshold for 'too many,' even though the server spans multiple subdomains (watchlist, analysis, assignments, folders, my accounts, assets, Drive, categories/tags). Obvious consolidation candidates exist — delete_folder/delete_folders, the three download-URL getters, and the parallel list_my_account_* listers — and the sheer surface is heavy for an agent to navigate.

Completeness4/5

Core workflows are thoroughly covered with no dead ends: watchlist → analyze → assign → folder → track → approve has full lifecycle support, including reversible archive vs permanent delete choices. Minor gaps exist but are work-aroundable: no create/update for my accounts or models (app-side OAuth/admin only), no way to delete a viral post or a post note, and asset upload only happens in the app.

Resources

Need Help?