CheckMyApp

Change a scenario

update_scenario

Destructive

Change a scenario by id: a team scenario's title and description; any scenario's description, whether it is checked every time (daily) and whether it is critical — walked on every check, whatever changed (the answer says what it adds per check; tell the person). restore: true brings back a retired one (list_scenarios retired: true), whoever retired it; it is checked again with its history. decision: the person's own answer on a scenario the check found — watch, or not_journey; critical: true also means watch. scenario_ids applies the same change to several. One an agent handed over only a person stops watching (not_journey, or daily: false), on the app's Journeys tab. A sentence handed over in expects stays something the scenario must show for as long as it stands in the description; take it out of the description and it is asked no more.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "update_scenario"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`team`	No	Act in another of your teams, by its name or id (whoami lists them). Omitted: the key's own team
`daily`	No	Checked by every check (true) or only when named (false)
`login`	No	The login it walks with, by label (list_apps test_accounts): "default", a named test account, or the app's session sign-in. Left out: the app's default. A login that is gone by the time of a check reports the scenario not checked, never walked as someone else; null: the app's default again
`title`	No	New title (team scenarios only)
`restore`	No	true: bring back a retired scenario (list_scenarios retired: true); it is checked again
`critical`	No	true: walked on every check — every deploy, preview and daily check — even when nothing near it changed; the answer says what it adds to each check's price. false: walked when something near it changes
`decision`	No	The person's decision on a scenario the check found: watch it in every check, or it is not a journey. Pass their own words, never your guess
`description`	No	New description; "" clears it
`scenario_id`	No	From list_scenarios or get_review
`scenario_ids`	No	Or: several scenario ids, each given the same change

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedNov 5, 2026

TDQS

A3.8/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Beyond the annotations, it discloses meaningful behavior: restore brings a scenario back with its history and it is checked again, critical raises the per-check cost ('the answer says what it adds to each check's price; tell the person'), a missing login yields 'not checked' rather than being walked as someone else, and title changes are team-only. The destructiveHint is not restated, but annotations already carry that, and the added human-in-the-loop restriction is exactly the kind of context annotations cannot express.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The purpose is front-loaded, but the body is a run-on with em-dash tangents ('walked on every check, whatever changed (the answer says what it adds per check; tell the person)') that force re-reading. Per-parameter facts are interleaved rather than structured, costing more effort than the information warrants.

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 10-parameter mutation tool with no output schema, most behaviors are covered, but two gaps remain: the relationship between scenario_id and scenario_ids (mutually exclusive?) is unstated, and the 'expects' sentence describes a field that is not in the schema. An agent could still call it, but with avoidable ambiguity.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3, but the description genuinely adds meaning: decision must be the person's own words ('never your guess'), critical means walked on every deploy/preview/daily check, and scenario_ids applies one change to many. It also mentions 'expects' as if it were a parameter, which does not exist in the schema and adds avoidable confusion.

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?

Opens with a specific verb+resource ('Change a scenario by id') and enumerates the mutable facets (title, description, daily, critical, restore, decision), which cleanly separates it from add_scenario/remove_scenario siblings. It stops short of naming those siblings explicitly, and the long trailing clauses dilute the initial clarity.

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 concrete routing cues: restore: true pairs with list_scenarios retired: true, decision applies to 'a scenario the check found', and an agent-handed-over scenario can only be stopped by a person (not_journey or daily: false) on the Journeys tab. It never states when to use this versus add_scenario or remove_scenario, so the exclusion side is incomplete.

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

All CheckMyApp 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.