tollbooth-authority

authority_update_operator

Update an existing Operator's community registry entry.

Requires the same two proofs as register_operator:

proof proves the caller controls the Operator's npub.
authority_proof proves the Authority's human admin consents to the change. Without the Authority proof, anyone with the Operator's nsec could redirect their own service_url under this Authority's signature without the Authority's awareness.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`npub`	No	Nostr npub of the Operator to update.
`dpop_token`	No
`service_url`	No	New MCP endpoint URL (leave empty to keep current).
`display_name`	No	New display name (leave empty to keep current).
`authority_proof`	No	Identity proof signed by the Authority's OWN npub — the Authority's consent to modify this Operator's registry entry.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedJul 16, 2026

TDQS

A4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Discloses proof requirements and security implications of missing authority_proof. Without annotations, this provides useful behavioral context, though it omits return value and error details.

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?

Concise paragraph with front-loaded purpose. Every sentence adds value, though it could be structured into bullet points for clarity.

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?

Covers purpose and proof requirements but lacks mention of update behavior (only provided fields changed) and output details. Output schema exists, reducing need for return value description, but the missing 'proof' parameter gap reduces completeness.

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?

Adds meaning to authority_proof beyond schema by explaining consent. However, description mentions a 'proof' parameter not present in schema, creating inconsistency despite 80% schema coverage.

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 clearly states it updates an existing Operator's community registry entry, distinguishing it from register and deregister siblings.

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?

Explicitly requires two proofs and explains their roles, giving clear context for when to use. However, does not explicitly state alternatives or when not to use.

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

All tollbooth-authority 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.