Help by DeltaBreen

set_form_fields

Idempotent

Replace the fields a site's form asks. Give the whole list in order (start from get_form_fields): a field left out is removed from the form, and tickets already sent keep their answers. A severity field sets the ticket's priority. Owner or admin.

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": {
      "product_id": "<product_id>",
      "fields": "<fields>"
    },
    "name": "set_form_fields"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`fields`	Yes	Every field the form should ask, in order. This replaces the list: a field left out is removed from the form (tickets already sent keep their answers).
`product_id`	Yes	The site's id (a uuid), from list_products.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed3 schema fields changedOct 27, 2026
- changedInput schema / $defs / FormField / properties / options / type
```
Previous value: -[
-  "array",
-  "null"
-]New value: +"array"
```
- changedInput schema / $defs / FormField / properties / preset / type
```
Previous value: -[
-  "string",
-  "null"
-]New value: +"string"
```
- changedInput schema / $defs / FormField / properties / required / type
```
Previous value: -[
-  "boolean",
-  "null"
-]New value: +"boolean"
```
First observedOct 27, 2026

TDQS

A4.4/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the annotations (readOnlyHint=false, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false) it discloses the key consequence: omitted fields are removed from the form, while answers on already-sent tickets survive. It also states the access requirement ("Owner or admin") and the severity→ticket-priority side effect, none of which appear in the structured fields.

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?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with the action and its destructive scope, with no filler. The closing "Owner or admin." is terse but carries real permission information.

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?

For a two-parameter, fully documented write tool with annotations and no output schema, the description supplies the missing behavioral layer: replacement semantics, ticket-answer preservation, prerequisite source call, and required role. Nothing essential to calling it correctly is absent.

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 100%, so product_id and the FormField structure are already fully documented, including preset, show_when and option value rules. The description mainly restates the ordering/replacement semantics of `fields` and adds only the severity-sets-priority detail, so baseline 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?

"Replace the fields a site's form asks" is a specific verb (replace) plus a precise resource (a product's form field list), and it names the read counterpart get_form_fields so the agent can separate read from write immediately.

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?

It gives a concrete workflow prerequisite ("start from get_form_fields") and states the whole-list replacement contract, which tells an agent this is not a partial-update call. It does not, however, clarify against related writers such as save_form or use_simple_form, so the when-not side is only partially covered.

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

All Help by DeltaBreen 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.

Resources

Need Help?