Proof Holdings

update_circle

Destructive

Update a Circle's name and/or owner name. Omitted fields are left unchanged; the profile/identity binding is create-only.

ACCESS: needs a Proof account. Authenticate this client (Claude Code: /mcp → Authenticate), then call this tool again. start_login does NOT open this tool.

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": {
      "id": "<id>"
    },
    "name": "update_circle"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`id`	Yes	Circle ID
`name`	No	New name for the Circle
`owner_name`	No	How this Circle's members know its owner ("Dad", "Giorgi"). The bots name the owner by it; while it is empty they name nobody — the Circle's name labels the group, never the person. Trimmed by the API; null or an empty value clears it.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description
`id`	No	MongoDB ObjectId
`name`	No
`status`	No	Lifecycle state of a Circle (archived = soft-retired)
`members`	No
`user_id`	No
`created_at`	No
`owner_name`	No	How this Circle's members know its owner; null when unset
`profile_id`	No
`updated_at`	No
`environment`	No
`member_count`	No
`proof_me_enabled`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedNov 2, 2026

changedOutput schema / (root)

Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "$schema": "http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#",
+  "additionalProperties": {},
+  "properties": {
+    "created_at": {},
+    "environment": {},
+    "id": {
+      "description": "MongoDB ObjectId"
+    },
+    "member_count": {},
+    "members": {},
+    "name": {},
+    "owner_name": {
+      "description": "How this Circle's members know its owner; null when unset"
+    },
+    "profile_id": {},
+    "proof_me_enabled": {},
+    "status": {
+      "description": "Lifecycle state of a Circle (archived = soft-retired)"
+    },
+    "updated_at": {},
+    "user_id": {}
+  },
+  "type": "object"
+}

Changed1 schema field changedOct 26, 2026
- removedInput schema / additionalProperties
```
Removed value: -false
```

Changed1 schema field changedOct 4, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / owner_name

Added value: +{
+  "anyOf": [
+    {
+      "maxLength": 100,
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    {
+      "type": "null"
+    }
+  ],
+  "description": "How this Circle's members know its owner (\"Dad\", \"Giorgi\"). The bots name the owner by it; while it is empty they name nobody — the Circle's name labels the group, never the person. Trimmed by the API; null or an empty value clears it."
+}

First observedSep 19, 2026

TDQS

A4.3/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

The description adds useful behavior beyond the annotations: omitted fields are left unchanged, the profile/identity binding is create-only, and a Proof account plus client authentication is required. With readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=true already declared, this is solid contextual disclosure, though it does not elaborate on the practical impact of the destructive annotation.

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?

The description is front-loaded with the core action and constraint, followed by a clearly separated access note. Every sentence contributes either mutation semantics or the authentication prerequisite, with no filler.

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?

Given the full input schema, an output schema, and mutation annotations, the description covers the remaining critical context: what fields can change, what happens to omitted fields, the create-only binding restriction, and the authentication requirement. Nothing essential for calling this tool correctly appears to be missing.

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%, so the schema already carries the parameter semantics, including the ID format and owner_name behavior. The description adds only the omitted-fields-unchanged rule and the create-only binding caveat, which is useful but not a substitute for schema detail.

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 states a specific verb and resource: update a Circle's name and/or owner name. It clearly distinguishes the mutation from sibling operations like create_circle, get_circle, delete_circle, and list_circles, and the create-only binding note further scopes the action.

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 clear usage context: update existing Circle fields, omitted fields stay unchanged, and profile/identity binding is create-only. It also provides an authentication prerequisite and explicitly warns that start_login does not open this tool, though it does not explicitly name alternatives such as create_circle or get_circle.

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

All Proof Holdings 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.