Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Weav

by com.weav
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Edit Help Center improvement proposal

kb_edit_proposal
Destructive

Save a pending Help Center improvement proposal's title and Markdown without publishing. Keeps a new-article draft synchronized; updates leave the published article unchanged. Read with kb_get_proposal first. Use this rather than kb_update_article for suggestion drafts. Separate from agent training data.

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": {
      "proposal_id": "<proposal_id>",
      "title": "<title>",
      "content": "<content>"
    },
    "name": "kb_edit_proposal"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
titleYesFull replacement title, at most 255 characters.
contentYesFull replacement Markdown, including image URLs and native components; at most 1,048,576 characters. Saving does not publish.
proposal_idYesUUID of the pending Help Center improvement proposal to edit.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Added

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, openWorldHint=true and destructiveHint=true; the description adds the crucial scope fact that nothing is published and the live article is untouched. What it does not spell out is that the existing draft title/content is fully replaced, which is the actual destructive act implied by the annotation — that detail is only carried by the schema's 'Full replacement' wording.

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 core constraint (save without publishing) is front-loaded and no sentence is filler. The phrase 'Keeps a new-article draft synchronized' is slightly opaque and would be sharper as a direct statement about which draft is affected.

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 3-parameter mutation with full schema coverage and no output schema, the definition supplies the essentials: read first, don't publish, don't confuse with article updates. The only meaningful gap is a note on what the call returns or the overwrite semantics for existing draft content.

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

Parameters3/5

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

Schema description coverage is 100%, with types, UUID format, character caps, and even the 'Saving does not publish' note already in the schema. The description adds no parameter-level meaning beyond that, so the documented baseline of 3 applies.

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 definition names a specific verb (save/edit) and resource (a pending Help Center improvement proposal's title and Markdown) and explicitly contrasts that with kb_update_article and agent training data. An agent can distinguish it from kb_create_article and kb_update_article without opening any schema.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

It gives both a prerequisite ('Read with kb_get_proposal first') and an explicit alternative-selection rule ('Use this rather than kb_update_article for suggestion drafts'), plus an exclusion ('Separate from agent training data'). This is the when/when-not guidance that routes an agent correctly among the siblings.

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

All Weav toolsInspect
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