Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

CutClip.one

by one.cutclip
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

character.update

Update a character's name, description or voice

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": {
      "projectId": "<projectId>",
      "expectedVersion": "<expectedVersion>",
      "characterId": "<characterId>"
    },
    "name": "character.update"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameNo
roleNo
notesNo
voiceIdNoElevenLabs voice this character speaks with (voice.list); null clears it
wardrobeNo
projectIdYes
voiceNameNoThe voice's display name, as voice.list gives it
appearanceNoFace, hair, build, age — identity details that must not drift
characterIdYes
descriptionNo
expectedVersionYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

C2.4/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden and largely drops it. It never explains that the call is a partial update of only the supplied fields, that expectedVersion implies optimistic concurrency (and what happens on a version mismatch), or that null on voiceId/voiceName clears the voice — even though the schema hints at clearing semantics for voiceId only.

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

Conciseness3/5

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

The single sentence is front-loaded and free of padding, but its brevity comes at the cost of under-specification rather than efficiency. Every word earns its place, yet far too few words are present for an 11-parameter mutation.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness2/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a mutation with 11 parameters, a required version token, no annotations and no output schema, the definition is not complete enough for confident invocation. An agent would likely omit fields it does not know are updatable, or fail to supply a correct expectedVersion on the first attempt.

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

Parameters2/5

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

Schema description coverage is only 27%, so the description needs to compensate and mostly does not. It names three of eleven parameters (name, description, voice) but says nothing about role, notes, wardrobe, appearance, voiceName, or the semantics of the required expectedVersion and projectId/characterId scoping.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose3/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description states a clear verb and resource ("Update a character's...") and separates it from siblings like character.create and character.get. However, it enumerates only name, description and voice as mutable fields, while the schema exposes 11 properties including role, notes, wardrobe, appearance and voiceName, so the stated scope materially understates the tool's purpose.

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?

No when-to-use condition, no mention of prerequisites, and no routing to alternatives such as character.get (to read current state) or character.create (for new characters) is given. Usage is only inferable from the tool name and the word "Update".

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

All CutClip.one 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