Atwork

Update Your Profile

profile.update

DestructiveIdempotent

Change the user's own profile: first and last name, job title (from the organization's list), @handle, pronouns, bio, phone number, status line, timezone and out-of-office days. Only the fields given change. Who sees each field is a preference (preferences.update profileVisibility). Working hours: working_hours.update.

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`bio`	No	Up to 280 characters; empty clears it
`job`	No	A job title from the organization's Jobs list, by name; jobs are never created here
`phone`	No	Phone number as the user wrote it: digits, spaces and + ( ) - . only, at least 3 digits; empty clears it. Who sees it is a preference.
`handle`	No	The @handle of the public profile
`status`	No	The status line next to the name; null clears it
`lastName`	No
`pronouns`	No	Empty clears them
`timezone`	No	IANA zone, e.g. Europe/Berlin
`firstName`	No
`outOfOffice`	No	Whole-day time off in the calendar, inclusive days; the list replaces current and future whole-day time off, past time off is kept; to: null = until further notice; null clears it

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`saved`	Yes	Each changed field as saved

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedNov 5, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / phone

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Phone number as the user wrote it: digits, spaces and + ( ) - . only, at least 3 digits; empty clears it. Who sees it is a preference.",
+  "maxLength": 32,
+  "type": "string"
+}

AddedNov 4, 2026

TDQS

A4.2/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=true; the description adds the important mitigating fact that 'Only the fields given change', i.e. this is a partial patch rather than a replace. It does not warn which operations are destructive (e.g. clearing fields with empty strings, replacing the out-of-office list) or note handle-uniqueness/auth requirements, so the destructive hint is unexplained.

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: capability and field list first, then the partial-update rule, then the two cross-references. No filler, and the most decision-relevant fact (only given fields change) is front-loaded near the top.

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 the cross-tool routing plus patch semantics cover the main agent risks for a 10-parameter mutation. What is missing is any statement of consequences for clearing fields or replacing out-of-office ranges, and confirmation requirements for a tool flagged destructive.

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 80%, so the schema already documents almost every field, including the out-of-office replacement rule and empty-string clearing. The description only restates the field list and adds that the job title must come from the organization's Jobs list, which the schema also says. Baseline 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?

States a specific verb (change) and resource (the user's own profile) and enumerates the exact fields it can modify. The 'own profile' scoping implicitly separates it from the sibling member.update_profile, so an agent can select between them without opening either 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?

Explicitly routes two adjacent concerns elsewhere: field visibility goes to preferences.update (profileVisibility) and working hours go to working_hours.update, which prevents misdirected calls. It does not explicitly state a when-not condition versus member.update_profile, leaving that to inference from 'own'.

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

All Atwork 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?