Visual Sentinel

Change workspace branding

vs_workspace_branding_update

DestructiveIdempotent

Change the workspace branding used on reports, emails and status pages, or turn white-label on or off. Your plan sets which parts apply. Only the fields you send change. Needs an owner or admin account.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "vs_workspace_branding_update"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`replyTo`	No	Where client replies go; empty clears it.
`faviconUrl`	No	https address of a favicon for status pages (Agency); empty clears it.
`fontFamily`	No	Font name (up to 100 characters).
`accentColor`	No	Hex color, #RRGGBB.
`emailFooter`	No	Footer text for emails (up to 500 characters).
`primaryColor`	No	Hex color, #RRGGBB.
`showPoweredBy`	No	Show the "Powered by" line.
`secondaryColor`	No	Hex color, #RRGGBB.
`whitelabelEnabled`	No	true hides Visual Sentinel branding where your plan allows.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedOct 25, 2026

TDQS

A4.4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare a non-read-only, destructive, idempotent, open-world operation; the description adds valuable context beyond them: plan-based field gating, the merge-vs-replace semantics, and the owner/admin authorization requirement. It stops short of explaining what the destructiveHint actually implies (e.g. whether clearing a field is reversible), which keeps it at 4.

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?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with the action and its scope, then the behavioral constraint, then the authorization requirement. No filler and no repetition of schema detail.

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 a 9-parameter, all-optional mutation with no output schema, it covers the essentials an agent needs: scope, partial-update semantics, plan gating, and auth. The remaining gap is the destructive designation — nothing tells the agent that clearing a branding field or disabling white-label may affect live status pages and emails.

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% and per-field descriptions are already precise (formats, length caps, empty-clears behavior), so the baseline is 3. The description adds cross-cutting meaning the schema cannot: which fields are actually applicable depends on the plan, and that omitted fields are left untouched.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Change the workspace branding') and enumerates the surfaces affected (reports, emails, status pages) plus the white-label toggle. Clear enough to separate it from the read counterpart vs_workspace_branding_get and from the broader vs_workspace_settings_update.

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?

Gives concrete preconditions — plan determines which fields apply, and an owner or admin account is required — and clarifies the partial-update contract ('Only the fields you send change'). It does not name an alternative tool or state when not to use it, so it falls short of a 5.

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

All Visual Sentinel 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.