Skip to main content
Glama

dialogbrain

by io.github.saloprj
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

artifacts_update

Republish an existing artifact with new HTML. The slug and URL stay the SAME; a new version is stored (older versions are retained up to a cap). Use this to refresh a shared dashboard — anyone with the link sees the new snapshot.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
htmlYesThe new full self-contained HTML page (same contract as artifacts.create).
labelNoOptional human name for this version (e.g. 'Q3 final').
templateNoOptional: attach/replace the data-driven template (HTML with {{placeholder}} tokens) on this existing artifact, so later artifacts.refresh(data={...}) can re-render it server-side. Pass the html rendered from this template. Omit to leave the template unchanged.
artifact_idYesThe artifact to republish.
in_workspaceNoRun this one call in this workspace id instead of the session's. Nothing is stored; other sessions are not affected.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / in_workspace
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Run this one call in this workspace id instead of the session's. Nothing is stored; other sessions are not affected.",
+  "type": "integer"
+}
  2. Added
  3. Removed
  4. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / template
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Optional: attach/replace the data-driven template (HTML with {{placeholder}} tokens) on this existing artifact, so later artifacts.refresh(data={...}) can re-render it server-side. Pass the html rendered from this template. Omit to leave the template unchanged.",
+  "type": "string"
+}
  5. Added

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations only declare the safety profile (not read-only, not idempotent, not destructive); the description adds meaningful behavior beyond that: slug/URL stability, new-version creation, a retention cap on older versions, and that link-holders see the new snapshot. That is real value the agent cannot get from the structured fields. It stops short of covering permissions or the return payload.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the core action and its most important invariant (same URL), then the retention/visibility behavior. Every clause carries information; nothing is wasted.

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 mutation tool with no output schema and full schema coverage, the description covers the behavioral consequences an agent needs (URL stability, versioning, retention, visibility). It omits auth requirements and what the call returns (e.g. new version id), which keeps it from a 5.

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 artifact_id, html, label, template, and in_workspace. The description adds no per-parameter syntax or constraints beyond what the schema states, so the baseline 3 applies.

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+resource (republish an existing artifact with new HTML) and immediately discloses the key distinguishing behavior: slug and URL stay the same while a new version is stored. An agent can tell this apart from artifacts_create (new artifact) and artifacts_refresh (server-side re-render) without opening any schema.

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?

Gives one concrete use case ("refresh a shared dashboard"), which is implied guidance, but never names or contrasts with the obvious alternatives artifacts_create or artifacts_refresh. The template parameter hints at a relationship with artifacts_refresh, but the routing condition (replace HTML vs. re-render from data) is left to inference.

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

All dialogbrain 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