Taseli

Change the brand kit

update_brand_kit

Idempotent

Set what the owner said about the brand: colours (#RRGGBB), fonts, tone, a brand line, what the brand always does and never does. Only the keys sent change; an empty string or list clears one. Every ad made after follows it.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "update_brand_kit"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`do`	No	What the brand always does (replaces the list).
`dont`	No	What the brand never does (replaces the list).
`name`	No	The business's name exactly as it writes it.
`tone`	No	How the brand talks, in a sentence.
`fonts`	No
`colors`	No	Brand colours as #RRGGBB.
`address`	No	Hebrew address form for customers ("" clears).
`imagery`	No	The look of the brand's pictures.
`tagline`	No
`language`	No	Answer language.
`toneWords`	No	The tone in three words.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description
`note`	No	A plain note instead of data (nothing connected yet, not available here).
`error`	No	Why nothing was done, as a short code.
`truncated`	No
`truncatedNote`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedNov 3, 2026

TDQS

A3.9/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare non-read-only, idempotent and non-destructive, so the description does not need to restate safety. It does add two behaviors beyond them: partial-update semantics ('Only the keys sent change') and an explicit clearing rule (empty string or list clears a field), plus the downstream effect that future ads inherit the kit. Missing only ownership/permission detail behind 'the owner said'.

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 short sentences, front-loaded with the resource list, then the update semantics, then the consequence. Nothing is repeated from the schema and no sentence is filler.

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?

With 11 optional parameters, nested color/font objects and an output schema, the critical thing an agent needs is how partial updates and clearing work, and that is covered. Minor gaps remain around whether a brand kit must already exist, validation of color values, and how empty-object vs empty-string nesting behaves.

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 coverage is already 82%, so the baseline is 3. The description goes past the schema by explaining the merge/patch model and the empty-value clearing convention, which applies to many of the 11 parameters at once and is not stated per-parameter. It also gives the #RRGGBB format expectation for colours.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb (set) and resource (the brand kit: colours, fonts, tone, brand line, do/don't), so an agent knows exactly what is written. It does not name get_brand_kit as the read counterpart, but the write framing is unambiguous against all siblings.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

Usage is implied through 'Set what the owner said about the brand' and 'Every ad made after follows it', which signals this is the configuration tool rather than the ad-making tool. There is no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance and no pointer to get_brand_kit for reading the current kit.

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

All Taseli 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?