Surli MCP

update_destination

DestructiveIdempotent

Update the target destination URL of an existing short link.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`surl`	Yes	The short URL or alias to update
`new_destination_url`	Yes	The new destination URL

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`short_url`	Yes	The short URL that was updated
`user_message`	No	Human-readable confirmation message
`dashboard_url`	No	Link to manage this short URL in the Surli dashboard
`destination_url`	Yes	The newly set destination URL

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedSep 9, 2026

changedOutput schema / (root)

Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "properties": {
+    "dashboard_url": {
+      "description": "Link to manage this short URL in the Surli dashboard",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "destination_url": {
+      "description": "The newly set destination URL",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "short_url": {
+      "description": "The short URL that was updated",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "user_message": {
+      "description": "Human-readable confirmation message",
+      "type": "string"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "short_url",
+    "destination_url"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}

First observedSep 8, 2026

TDQS

A3.8/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare the operation is write-capable (readOnlyHint false), destructive (destructiveHint true), and idempotent (idempotentHint true). The description adds that it targets an existing short link, clarifying it modifies rather than creates or deletes the link itself, but it does not go beyond that to describe side effects or reversibility.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence with no filler. Every word contributes to identifying the action and target, making it highly efficient.

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?

With fully described parameters, annotations covering safety, and an output schema present, the description is adequate for an agent to invoke the tool correctly. The only notable gap is the lack of explicit guidance on choosing this tool over update_alias, which is more a usage guideline nuance than a missing critical detail.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100% and both parameters ('surl' and 'new_destination_url') are clearly explained in the schema. The description adds no additional meaning beyond restating the operation, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 precise verb ('update') and resource ('target destination URL of an existing short link'), making the operation unambiguous. It implicitly distinguishes itself from the sibling 'update_alias' by referencing the destination URL rather than the alias.

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?

The description clearly implies when to use the tool—when the destination URL of an existing short link needs to be changed. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or explain when not to use it (e.g., when updating the alias instead), leaving the distinction from update_alias to inference.

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

All Surli MCP 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.

Resources

Need Help?