Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Umtri

by io.umtri
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Update filed feedback

update_feedback

Updates one feedback record about Umtri the product — typically closing it: status="done" once it shipped, or "wontfix" when it was declined. Put what was actually done (or why not) in note; that is the part worth reading a year later. Umtri operators only: every other account gets 403. Send only the fields that change. Requires a write-scope token.

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": {
      "id": "<id>"
    },
    "name": "update_feedback"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYesFeedback number, as returned by send_feedback / list_feedback.
bodyNo
kindNo
noteNoWhat was done about it, or why it was declined.
titleNo
sourceNo
statusNoopen → done (handled) / wontfix (declined).

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4.1/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

No annotations exist, so the description carries the full load and does well: it discloses the authorization model (Umtri operators only, 403 for everyone else), the token scope required, and the partial-update contract ('send only the fields that change'). It stops short of saying what the response looks like or whether changes are reversible.

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

Conciseness4/5

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

Front-loads the core action and the typical closing scenario in the first clause, then layers constraints. Slight waste in the chattier aside ('that is the part worth reading a year later') and the markdown emphasis, but nothing is redundant.

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 7-parameter mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, it covers the essentials an agent needs before calling: authorization, token scope, partial-update behavior, and the semantics of the two fields that matter most. Return shape and the meaning of the non-status fields are the remaining gaps.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

With only 43% schema coverage, the description should compensate more than it does — it adds real meaning for status (open → done/wontfix) and note (the durable record of what was done or why declined), but body, kind, title, and source get no explanation in either place, and the required id is left entirely to the schema.

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?

States a specific verb (updates) and resource (one feedback record), and even names the dominant use case — closing via status="done" or "wontfix". It is clearly distinguishable from the sibling creators/readers (send_feedback, list_feedback) without opening any schema.

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 usage context: 'typically closing it', send only changed fields, operator-only access, and a write-scope token requirement. It does not explicitly say 'to create a new record use send_feedback instead', so the alternative routing is implied rather than spelled out.

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

All Umtri toolsInspect
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.

Resources