Skip to main content
Glama

Courier

by io.github.trycourier

update_provider

DestructiveIdempotent

Replace an existing provider configuration. Full replacement — retrieve current config with get_provider first; omitted optional fields are cleared. Changing API keys or settings affects live delivery if this integration is in use.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
aliasNoShort alias
titleNoDisplay name
providerYesProvider key (must match existing; changing provider type is not supported)
settingsNoProvider-specific settings
provider_idYesThe provider configuration ID

TDQS

A4.7/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already mark this as destructive and non-read-only, but the description adds crucial context: full replacement clears omitted fields, and changes affect live delivery if the integration is in use. This goes well beyond the annotations.

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 dense, purposeful sentences. The action, prerequisite, and consequences are all stated without redundancy or fluff, and the most important behavioral fact is front-loaded.

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

Completeness5/5

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

The description gives the agent everything needed to use this tool correctly: what it does, how to prepare with get_provider, what happens to omitted fields, and the operational impact on live delivery. No output schema exists, but for this mutation tool the missing response details are not a barrier to correct invocation.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the parameters are already well documented. The description adds valuable behavior not in the schema, such as full-replacement clearing omitted optional fields and the live-delivery consequence of changing settings.

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 uses a specific verb and resource: 'Replace an existing provider configuration.' Saying 'existing' and 'Full replacement' clearly distinguishes it from create_provider, delete_provider, or partial updates.

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?

The description gives concrete usage guidance: retrieve current config with get_provider first, and warns that omitted optional fields are cleared. It doesn't explicitly list create/delete alternatives, but the context makes the replace-vs-create/delete distinction clear.

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

All Courier toolsInspect
Try in Browser
RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

B3.1/5.0
Disambiguation3/5

Tools are mostly organized as distinct resource/action pairs, but several clusters are easy to confuse: list subscription tools (add_subscribers_to_list vs bulk_subscribe_to_list vs subscribe_user_to_list), message vs message-content vs message-history retrieval, and the many journey/journey-template list/get tools. Detailed descriptions rescue most selections, but the sheer number of near-identical verb/resource names creates real misselection risk.

Naming Consistency4/5

Almost all tools follow a snake_case verb_noun pattern (create_, get_, list_, replace_, send_, publish_, archive_). Minor deviations keep it from a perfect score: courier_installation_guide is noun-first, and add_bulk_users sits awkwardly next to the bulk_add_* family, but the overall convention is predictable and readable.

Tool Count1/5

144 tools is an extreme working-set size for an agent to hold and choose from, far beyond the reasonable 3–15 range. Even for a broad platform like Courier, this should be split into focused sub-servers (templates, journeys, users, lists, preferences, etc.) to remain usable.

Completeness4/5

The surface is remarkably comprehensive, covering sending, templates, journeys, automations, users, tenants, lists, preferences, providers, routing, brands, audiences, translations, digests, bulk jobs, and audit events. Notable gaps exist—automation template CRUD and digest schedule management are missing—but most workflows can still be completed with workarounds.

Resources