Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Phare

by io.phare.mcp
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Update a project

update_project
DestructiveIdempotent

Update a project by ID, the fields left out keep their current value. A members list replaces the current members.

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": {
      "project_id": "<project_id>"
    },
    "name": "update_project"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameNoProject name
membersNoList of team members that are part of this project
settingsNoProject settings
project_idYesID of the project to update

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idNoProject ID
nameNoProject name
slugNoProject slug
membersNoList of team members that are part of this project
settingsNoProject settings
created_atNoDate of creation for the entity
updated_atNoDate of last update for the entity

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "properties": {
+    "created_at": {
+      "description": "Date of creation for the entity",
+      "format": "date-time",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "id": {
+      "description": "Project ID",
+      "examples": [
+        1
+      ],
+      "type": "integer"
+    },
+    "members": {
+      "description": "List of team members that are part of this project",
+      "examples": [
+        [
+          1,
+          2,
+          3
+        ]
+      ],
+      "items": {
+        "type": "integer"
+      },
+      "type": "array"
+    },
+    "name": {
+      "description": "Project name",
+      "examples": [
+        "Luminous Guiding Tower"
+      ],
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "settings": {
+      "description": "Project settings",
+      "properties": {
+        "incident_merging_time_window": {
+          "default": 60,
+          "description": "Time window for incident merging in minutes",
+          "enum": [
+            5,
+            10,
+            30,
+            60,
+            120,
+            180
+          ],
+          "type": "integer"
+        },
+        "use_incident_ai": {
+          "default": true,
+          "description": "Whether to generate AI summaries for incidents",
+          "type": "boolean"
+        },
+        "use_incident_merging": {
+          "default": true,
+          "description": "Whether to use incident merging",
+          "type": "boolean"
+        }
+      },
+      "type": "object"
+    },
+    "slug": {
+      "description": "Project slug",
+      "examples": [
+        "luminous-guiding-tower"
+      ],
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "updated_at": {
+      "description": "Date of last update for the entity",
+      "format": "date-time",
+      "type": "string"
+    }
+  },
+  "type": "object"
+}
  2. First observed

TDQS

A3.5/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=true, idempotentHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description does add genuinely useful behavior beyond them: omitted fields retain current values (PATCH semantics) and the members list is fully replaced rather than merged, which is exactly the destructive risk the annotations flag. It stays silent, however, on whether the nested settings object is merged or replaced and on permission requirements.

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 short sentences, front-loaded with the core action and addressing key, followed by the partial-update rule. Every clause carries information an agent needs; nothing is padding.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need no explanation, and a mutation tool with full annotation coverage and full schema coverage needs only the write-semantics context, which is largely supplied. The remaining gap is the nested settings object's replacement behavior.

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 adds meaning the schema lacks: it clarifies that project_id addresses the target and that any field not supplied is left untouched. The explicit "replaces the current members" note disambiguates the members array beyond its generic schema description, though the settings object's merge semantics remain unstated.

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?

The description names a specific verb and resource ("Update a project") and identifies the addressing key ("by ID"), which separates it from create_project and delete_project. It does not explicitly name siblings, but the operation is unambiguous.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

There is no statement of when to use this tool versus alternatives (create_project, delete_project) and no prerequisites such as required permissions or scope. The partial-update note implies the intended use case but never says it outright.

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

All Phare toolsInspect
Try in Browser
Claude Code, inside the Godot 4 editorFlockbay puts an AI agent in the real Godot 4 editor: it writes GDScript, runs your game and fixes what breaks. Free, or bring your own Claude Code or Codex.flockbay.comAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources