FavCRM

update_account

Idempotent

Update CRM account/customer profile fields such as name, phone, email, life stage, owner, notes, or member code.

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`name`	No	Account/customer display name
`type`	No	Account type
`email`	No	Email address
`notes`	No	Internal notes
`phone`	No	Phone number
`gender`	No	Gender
`source`	No	Acquisition source
`lastName`	No	Last name for individual accounts
`accountId`	Yes	The account ID to update
`firstName`	No	First name for individual accounts
`lifeStage`	No	CRM life stage
`assignedTo`	No	Assigned team member user ID, or null to clear
`memberCode`	No	Merchant member code, or null to clear
`dateOfBirth`	No	YYYY-MM-DD date of birth, or null to clear
`referredByAccountId`	No	Referrer account ID, or null to clear

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description
`data`	Yes	Tool result payload — shape varies per tool, see the tool description
`summary`	Yes	One-line human-readable summary of the action
`renderType`	Yes	UI rendering hint for the result

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedOct 9, 2026

changedInput schema / properties / lifeStage / enum

Previous value: -[
-  "lead",
-  "active",
-  "churned",
-  "vip"
-]New value: +[
+  "lead",
+  "active",
+  "churned",
+  "vip",
+  "prospect"
+]

AddedJun 26, 2026

TDQS

B3.3/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare that this is a non-destructive, idempotent write operation. The description adds the scope of updatable profile fields, which is useful, but it does not explain partial update semantics, null-clearing behavior, or permission requirements.

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 a single front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. It efficiently communicates the tool's purpose and scope.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a 15-parameter mutation tool, the description is thin on usage and behavioral context. However, the rich input schema, output schema, and annotations cover most structural needs, leaving the definition adequate but with clear gaps in routing and semantics.

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 documents all 15 parameters in detail. The description names a handful of fields, but adds no syntax, format, or meaning beyond what the schema already provides, making this a baseline case.

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?

The description states a specific verb and resource: updating CRM account/customer profile fields, with examples. It is clear what the tool does, though it does not explicitly distinguish itself from siblings like update_contact, create_account, or delete_account.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

The description gives no when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, and no alternatives. It implies usage only through the field list, but does not explain when to choose update_account versus update_contact or another update tool.

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

All FavCRM 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.