Urlbox

Update a Urlbox project

update_project

DestructiveIdempotent

Change a project's settings: rename it, enable or disable it, require signed render links, or change its engine version. Only the fields you pass change. Setting tokenless to false means every render link for the project must be signed with the project's secret key; unsigned links stop working. Disabling a project stops it rendering until it is enabled again.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "intent": "<intent>",
      "project": "<project>"
    },
    "name": "update_project"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`name`	No	New project name, unique within the organisation.
`intent`	Yes	Required. In one or two sentences, what you are trying to achieve for the user with this call and why (for example: 'Screenshot the pricing page so the user can compare plans'). Recorded for analytics and audit; do not include secrets.
`enabled`	No	false disables the project: it stops rendering.
`project`	Yes	Project id (proj_…) or exact name. Use list_projects to see them.
`tokenless`	No	true allows unsigned render links; false requires every render link to be signed.
`engineVersion`	No	The rendering engine channel the project uses.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedNov 6, 2026

TDQS

A4.6/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the annotations, the description discloses key behavioral consequences: partial updates only affect supplied fields, setting tokenless to false invalidates unsigned render links, and disabling a project stops rendering until re-enabled. These details materially improve safe invocation of a destructive, idempotent operation.

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?

The description is three tight sentences with no filler. The most important constraint, that only passed fields change, is front-loaded, and each sentence adds distinct value.

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 six-parameter mutation tool with full schema descriptions and annotations, the description covers the essential behavior and side effects. It could further clarify less obvious operational details like immediate effect or auth requirements, but nothing critical is missing.

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 parameter meanings are already well documented. The description adds meaningful consequences beyond the schema for tokenless (unsigned links stop working) and enabled (project stops rendering), though it does not cover every parameter such as intent or project.

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 states a specific verb and resource ('Change a project's settings') and enumerates the exact settings that can be changed: rename, enable/disable, signed render links, and engine version. It is clearly distinguishable from sibling tools like create_project or get_project.

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?

It clearly implies this is for modifying an existing project and explains that only passed fields change, which is useful usage context. However, it does not explicitly name alternatives such as create_project for new projects or get_project for reading settings, nor does it state when not to use it.

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

All Urlbox 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.