Skip to main content
Glama

Update check

well_update_check
Destructive

Change a check's MICR line or issue date. Its check number and identity stay fixed. The MICR line is omitted from the write result.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
cmc7No
check_idYes
issue_dateNo
workspace_idNoTarget workspace. Omit when the token authorizes one workspace. Required when it authorizes several — a write lands in exactly one workspace and this call would not say which.
conversation_idNoThe conversation id returned by the previous Well result, in its meta under well/conversation_id, in its structuredContent, or in its JSON text block. Pass it back on every call in the same conversation, including a call a card makes, so the chosen workspace and the earlier answers still apply. It decides the conversation on its own: nothing the host states about the session replaces it. Omit it only on the first call of a conversation.
idempotency_keyNoOptional client-supplied key. A retried write with the same key returns the original result instead of re-applying the operation.
workspace_scopeNoRestrict this call to the family: the token's primary workspace plus the company workspaces under it that you are a member of. Unrelated authorized workspaces drop out of the read; row reads merge across the family, while a per-workspace figure still reports exactly one workspace.

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
codeNo
dataNo
errorNo
successYes
reply_linesNo
conversation_idNoThe conversation this result belongs to. Pass it back as the conversation_id argument on every later Well call in the same conversation.
near_candidatesNo
newly_connectedNoTools that connected to this workspace since the last result and that no session was told about yet, oldest first. Present only when at least one tool is new. The connected-line rule says when to tell an entry; when it does, one line per entry, in the person's language: "<name> is connected.". Never fold several entries into one sentence. Each entry comes back once, on one result only: never repeat its line later.
conversation_id_noteNoPresent only when the server opened a fresh lane, stating that no choice recorded earlier was read.
conversation_id_sourceNoWhere the conversation id came from: the host's own request meta, the caller's argument, or a fresh lane the server opened.
near_candidates_truncatedNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed10 schema fields changed
    • removedInput schema / properties / issue_date / anyOf
      Removed value: -[
      -  {
      -    "type": "string"
      -  },
      -  {
      -    "type": "null"
      -  }
      -]
    • addedInput schema / properties / issue_date / type
      Added value: +[
      +  "string",
      +  "null"
      +]
    • addedOutput schema / properties / code
      Added value: +{
      +  "type": "string"
      +}
    • removedOutput schema / properties / data / properties / attributes / properties / check_number / anyOf
      Removed value: -[
      -  {
      -    "type": "string"
      -  },
      -  {
      -    "type": "null"
      -  }
      -]
    • addedOutput schema / properties / data / properties / attributes / properties / check_number / type
      Added value: +[
      +  "string",
      +  "null"
      +]
    • removedOutput schema / properties / data / properties / attributes / properties / issue_date / anyOf
      Removed value: -[
      -  {
      -    "type": "string"
      -  },
      -  {
      -    "type": "null"
      -  }
      -]
    • addedOutput schema / properties / data / properties / attributes / properties / issue_date / type
      Added value: +[
      +  "string",
      +  "null"
      +]
    • addedOutput schema / properties / near_candidates
      Added value: +{
      +  "items": {
      +    "additionalProperties": false,
      +    "properties": {
      +      "company_id": {
      +        "type": "string"
      +      },
      +      "name": {
      +        "type": "string"
      +      }
      +    },
      +    "required": [
      +      "company_id",
      +      "name"
      +    ],
      +    "type": "object"
      +  },
      +  "type": "array"
      +}
    • addedOutput schema / properties / near_candidates_truncated
      Added value: +{
      +  "type": "boolean"
      +}
    • addedOutput schema / properties / reply_lines
      Added value: +{
      +  "items": {
      +    "type": "string"
      +  },
      +  "type": "array"
      +}
  2. Added

TDQS

B3.4/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, so the description does not need to restate mutability. It does add real value by disclosing invariants — check number and identity stay fixed — and by warning that the MICR line is omitted from the write result, but it never explains why this is flagged destructive (whether changes are reversible, what state the check must be in).

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, mutation scope front-loaded, followed by invariants and the one return-value caveat. No filler and nothing buried.

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?

An output schema exists, so the description only needs to flag the notable omission (MICR excluded from the result), which it does. Combined with rich schema descriptions for workspace/conversation/idempotency, this is nearly complete; only the destructive-confirmation context is 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 coverage is 57%, so several parameters lean on schema text. The description maps its two sentences onto 'cmc7' and 'issue_date', clarifying the domain meaning of the MICR field, but it never says both are optional or how a null value behaves, and workspace_scope/idempotency_key are explained only in the schema.

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 and resource ('Change a check's MICR line or issue date') and narrows scope to exactly two mutable fields, which cleanly separates it from well_create_check and well_delete_check. It stops short of naming a sibling, so a 5 isn't warranted.

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?

There is no explicit guidance on when to use this versus well_create_check or well_delete_check, and no prerequisites or exclusions are given (e.g. which check states are editable). The reader must infer usage from the field list alone.

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

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources