SplitLaunch

experiments_update

Partially update an existing experiment and return the updated experiment. Send only fields that should change; use experiments_set_status for lifecycle changes. Plus and Go cannot set URL pattern rules, and Go cannot set geo or traffic-source filters.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`name`	No
`projectId`	No	Optional project ID. Omit only when the API key is project-scoped or the account has a clear default project.
`targeting`	No	Optional targeting object. Device and visitor targeting are available on all plans; trafficFilters and geoFilters require Plus or Pro. Use documented pixel metadata keys such as utm_source, utm_medium, utm_campaign, device, browser, or geo fields.
`controlUrl`	No	Replacement control URL. Omit to keep the current value.
`experimentId`	Yes	Experiment ID returned by experiments_create or experiments_list.
`variationUrl`	No	Replacement variation URL. Omit to keep the current value.
`urlPatternRules`	No	Optional Pro-only URL pattern rules for advanced matching across multiple paths. Prefer simple controlUrl/variationUrl first.
`trafficAllocation`	No	Replacement variation share. Accepts 0-1 or 0-100.
`preserveRedirectParams`	No

TDQS

A4.4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations indicate mutation (readOnlyHint=false) and non-destructive (destructiveHint=false). Description adds value by specifying partial update behavior, return of updated object, and plan-specific constraints beyond 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?

Three sentences, front-loaded with purpose, then usage tip and plan limitations. No fluff, every sentence earns its place.

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?

Covers basic behavior, return value, and plan restrictions. Lacks explanation of response structure (no output schema), but experiments_get likely provides that context. Adequate for complexity.

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 coverage is high (78%), so baseline is 3. Description adds plan context for urlPatternRules and targeting, but does not elaborate on individual parameters beyond what the schema provides.

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?

Description states 'partially update an existing experiment' with a specific verb and resource, and distinguishes from sibling 'experiments_set_status' for lifecycle changes.

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?

Explicitly says to use for partial updates, avoid for lifecycle changes (use experiments_set_status), and notes plan limitations (Plus/Go cannot set URL pattern rules; Go cannot set geo/traffic-source filters).

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

All SplitLaunch 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

Disambiguation5/5

Each tool targets a distinct resource and action combination (e.g., domains_add, experiments_create, goals_deactivate, reports_experiment_chart). There is no overlap or ambiguity; even the three report tools serve clearly different purposes (totals, time-series, channel breakdown).

Naming Consistency4/5

The vast majority of tools follow a resource_action snake_case pattern (domains_add, experiments_list). A couple deviate (billing_portal, usage_summary) but still place the resource first, making the pattern predictable and easy to parse.

Tool Count5/5

With 23 tools covering projects, domains, experiments, goals, reports, billing, health, and usage, the count is well-scoped for a split-testing platform. Each tool addresses a specific need without ballooning into excessive granularity.

Completeness4/5

The tool surface provides CRUD-like operations for core entities (projects, experiments, goals, domains) and essential report types. Minor gaps exist (no goal update tool, no experiment delete—only archive) but these are reasonable trade-offs for the domain.

Resources

Need Help?