Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

RunLite

by in.runlite
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Re-deploy an existing site

update_site
Destructive

Re-deploys an existing site atomically, replacing all of its files: a live file not sent is removed. siteId is required, so it never creates a new site. Otherwise the same rules apply as for any deploy: a root index.html, website files only, and the plan limits.

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": {
      "siteId": "<siteId>",
      "files": "<files>"
    },
    "name": "update_site"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
filesYes
siteIdYes
messageNoShown in deployment history. e.g. "Added catering page"

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed3 schema fields changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / files / items / properties / content / description
      Added value: +"Required unless fromUpload is given."
    • addedInput schema / properties / files / items / properties / fromUpload
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "An imageId from list_uploads, in place of content: that photo as it was processed. The path needs its format's extension: .jpg or .jpeg for a JPEG, .png for a PNG, .webp for a WebP image.",
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • changedInput schema / properties / files / items / required
      Previous value: -[
-  "path",
-  "content"
-]New value: +[
+  "path"
+]
  2. First observed

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations declare destructiveHint=true, but the description adds the critical behavioral detail annotations cannot convey: 'a live file not sent is removed' — a full atomic replacement, not a merge. It also discloses the content rules (root index.html, website files only, plan limits) that constrain whether a call will succeed.

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?

Front-loaded with the destructive replace semantics, then constraints. Three dense sentences with little waste; 'Otherwise the same rules apply as for any deploy' is slightly indirect but efficiently delegates the shared rules.

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?

For a destructive mutation with no output schema, the description covers the replace-vs-merge semantics, creation guardrail, and content constraints. It omits what a successful deploy returns (status? URL? deployment record) and whether the operation is synchronous, which would matter for a multi-file upload.

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 only 33%, so the description must carry weight: it adds that siteId is required (avoiding accidental creates), what the path field should be relative to implicitly through the file set, and validation constraints (index.html, file types, plan limits) absent from the schema. It doesn't add per-file detail beyond the schema, but the semantic gap is largely filled.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Re-deploys an existing site atomically, replacing all of its files') and explicitly distinguishes itself from a create path ('siteId is required, so it never creates a new site'). An agent can separate it from deploy_site and patch_site without opening the schema.

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?

Gives clear selection context: it requires siteId and therefore cannot create a new site, implying deploy_site for creation. It does not explicitly name deploy_site or patch_site as alternatives, nor state when a full replace is preferable to a partial patch, so routing is implied rather than spelled out.

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

All RunLite toolsInspect
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