Skip to main content
Glama

Homespun

by dev.homespun

Update Row

update_row
Idempotent

Update an existing row in a v2 app's collection, replacing its data. Gated by the collection's update role list when it declares one, and by its write list otherwise, so a collection that scopes updates to the row's creator refuses an edit on someone else's row. Pass if_match with the row's current version for an optimistic-locked update; on a version mismatch the relay returns the current row, which is what a retry needs. Returns { row }.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
keyYesThe key of the row to update.
dataYesThe new row body (replaces the row's data) - any JSON value valid against the collection's row schema.
app_idYesThe app id.
if_matchNoOptional optimistic-lock version. On mismatch the update is rejected with the current row in details.current.
collectionYesThe collection name.

TDQS

A4.7/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Adds significant behavioral details beyond annotations: role-based access, optimistic locking with if_match, and retry behavior on version mismatch. No contradiction with annotations.

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?

Four sentences with no fluff. Purpose stated first, then authorization, then locking, then return. Every sentence earns its place.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Covers all necessary aspects: purpose, authorization, parameter semantics (via schema and description), and special behavior (optimistic locking). No output schema, but description adequately describes the return value as { row } and mismatch behavior.

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 covers all 5 parameters (100% coverage). The description adds value by explaining the purpose of if_match (optimistic locking and retry flow) beyond the schema's minimal description.

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 clearly states the verb-resource pair: 'Update an existing row in a v2 app's collection, replacing its data.' It distinguishes from siblings like delete_row and upsert_row by focusing on updating existing rows.

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?

Provides explicit context on authorization gating and optimistic locking behavior, but does not explicitly state when not to use this tool or name specific alternatives like upsert_row for create-or-update scenarios.

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

All Homespun 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

A4.1/5.0
Disambiguation4/5

Most tools are clearly distinct, with row operations (list, get, upsert, update, delete, restore) well separated. Some boundaries like apps vs deploy_app and credentials vs grants require careful reading, but descriptions resolve the overlap.

Naming Consistency2/5

Tool names mix resource nouns (apps, attachments, connections) with verb_noun actions (delete_row, deploy_app). Singular and plural forms are inconsistent, and there is no uniform pattern across the set.

Tool Count3/5

24 tools is on the heavy side, but the platform's breadth (app deployment, data, auth, community) justifies the count. Each tool has a distinct role, though the set slightly exceeds the typical well-scoped range.

Completeness4/5

The surface covers the full app lifecycle: deploy, manage, delete, row CRUD with restore, attachments, credentials, and community features. Minor gaps like no dedicated row search or outbound webhook management are workable via existing tools.

Resources