Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

LexQ

by io.lexq.mcp
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin
This connector has been deprecated

This listing duplicates LexQ (io.lexq/lexq), which follows the official MCP Registry entry. Use that listing instead.

Update Policy Group

lexq_groups_update
Destructive

Update a policy group. Only provided fields are updated; omitted fields remain unchanged. A deleted group cannot be updated (409 P-059).

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameNoNew name
statusNoDISABLED stops production execution of this group: execution calls return 403 (P-009), and a composite call that includes the group is rejected in full. The deployed version and any A/B test are kept, and dry run, Impact Simulation, and Decision Replay keep working, so a fix can be verified before setting ACTIVE again. To go back to the previous version, use lexq_deploy_rollback. To take the version out of production, use lexq_deploy_undeploy.
groupIdYesPolicy group ID
descriptionNoNew description
activationModeNoConflict resolution mode
executionLimitNoHow many policy groups sharing this activationGroup may run. Counts groups, not rules.
activationGroupNoActivation group (Execution Group) cluster key. Policy groups sharing this key compete, and group priority picks the winners.
activationStrategyNoRanking used to pick the winning groups

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / status / description
      Previous value: -"Status (DISABLED = emergency stop)"New value: +"DISABLED stops production execution of this group: execution calls return 403 (P-009), and a composite call that includes the group is rejected in full. The deployed version and any A/B test are kept, and dry run, Impact Simulation, and Decision Replay keep working, so a fix can be verified before setting ACTIVE again. To go back to the previous version, use lexq_deploy_rollback. To take the version out of production, use lexq_deploy_undeploy."
  2. Changed8 schema fields changed
    • changedInput schema / $schema
      Previous value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"New value: +"https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema"
    • removedInput schema / additionalProperties
      Removed value: -false
    • changedInput schema / properties / activationGroup / description
      Previous value: -"Activation group (Execution Group) cluster key"New value: +"Activation group (Execution Group) cluster key. Policy groups sharing this key compete, and group priority picks the winners."
    • changedInput schema / properties / activationStrategy / description
      Previous value: -"Strategy"New value: +"Ranking used to pick the winning groups"
    • changedInput schema / properties / activationStrategy / enum
      Previous value: -[
-  "FIRST_MATCH",
-  "HIGHEST_PRIORITY",
-  "MAX_BENEFIT"
-]New value: +[
+  "HIGHEST_PRIORITY"
+]
    • changedInput schema / properties / executionLimit / description
      Previous value: -"Max rule executions"New value: +"How many policy groups sharing this activationGroup may run. Counts groups, not rules."
    • addedInput schema / properties / executionLimit / maximum
      Added value: +9007199254740991
    • addedInput schema / properties / groupId / pattern
      Added value: +"^([0-9a-fA-F]{8}-[0-9a-fA-F]{4}-[1-8][0-9a-fA-F]{3}-[89abAB][0-9a-fA-F]{3}-[0-9a-fA-F]{12}|00000000-0000-0000-0000-000000000000|ffffffff-ffff-ffff-ffff-ffffffffffff)$"
  3. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / activationGroup
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Activation group (Execution Group) cluster key",
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • removedInput schema / properties / priority
      Removed value: -{
-  "description": "New priority",
-  "minimum": 0,
-  "type": "integer"
-}
  4. Changed6 schema fields changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / activationMode
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Conflict resolution mode",
+  "enum": [
+    "NONE",
+    "EXCLUSIVE",
+    "MAX_N"
+  ],
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / activationStrategy
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Strategy",
+  "enum": [
+    "FIRST_MATCH",
+    "HIGHEST_PRIORITY",
+    "MAX_BENEFIT"
+  ],
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • removedInput schema / properties / conflictResolutionMode
      Removed value: -{
-  "description": "Conflict resolution mode",
-  "enum": [
-    "NONE",
-    "EXCLUSIVE",
-    "MAX_N"
-  ],
-  "type": "string"
-}
    • removedInput schema / properties / conflictResolutionStrategy
      Removed value: -{
-  "description": "Strategy",
-  "enum": [
-    "FIRST_MATCH",
-    "HIGHEST_PRIORITY",
-    "MAX_BENEFIT"
-  ],
-  "type": "string"
-}
    • addedInput schema / properties / executionLimit
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Max rule executions",
+  "minimum": 1,
+  "type": "integer"
+}
    • removedInput schema / properties / maxSelections
      Removed value: -{
-  "description": "Max selections",
-  "minimum": 1,
-  "type": "integer"
-}
  5. First observed

TDQS

A3.9/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=true, so the safety profile is already covered. The description adds genuinely new behavioral context: only supplied fields change, omitted fields persist, and the update fails with a specific 409/P-059 on deleted groups. It stops short of stating auth requirements or whether the mutation is reversible.

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 short sentences, zero filler: identity first, then the mutation contract, then the failure case. Every sentence carries decision-relevant information and nothing is repeated from the schema.

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, the description plus annotations cover the essentials — what mutates, what is preserved, and the one documented failure mode. Missing only peripheral detail such as required scopes or what the response returns, which is minor here.

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 would be 3. The description earns above baseline by stating the cross-cutting optional-field contract (omitted fields are left unchanged), which governs how all seven optional parameters behave and is not expressed anywhere in the schema.

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?

States a specific verb+resource ('Update a policy group') that an agent can immediately place against the sibling CRUD set (lexq_groups_create/delete/get/list/reorder). It also distinguishes this from a full replace by stating partial-update semantics, though it doesn't name a sibling to route away from.

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 a real conditional: omitted fields remain unchanged (patch semantics), and a hard exclusion — a deleted group cannot be updated (409 P-059). However, it offers no guidance on when to reach for this tool versus lexq_groups_delete, lexq_groups_reorder, or lexq_deploy_rollback/undeploy for version-level changes.

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

All LexQ toolsInspect
Try in Browser
Shareable, User-Owned Context BackendPeople, applications, and agents read, write, and coordinate together in one context lake. Reach it over MCP, a CLI, a Python SDK, or REST.fulcradynamics.comAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources