Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

flayr

by social.flayr
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Update a brand profile

brand_profile_update
Idempotent

[writes flayr data · write scope] Fills in a brand's profile — e.g. { brandId, profile: { website: "https://…" } }. Changes only the fields you send; the voice, colors and fonts stay as they are unless you pass them. Use it to clear list_brands setup items such as hasWebsite. Owners, admins and editors only; every change is audited against this connection. (Wraps PATCH /api/v2/brand/intelligence.)

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "brand_profile_update"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
fontsNoFont family names. A role left out keeps its stored font. At least one is required.
voiceNoThe brand default voice. Created (as the default) when the brand has none.
colorsNoREPLACES the brand palette, the same as saving Brand → Overview → Brand Colors: the stored list is primary, secondary, then palette (duplicates dropped); primary and secondary are its top two. 6-digit hex, `#` optional, stored lower case.
brandIdNoA brand id from GET /api/v2/brands. A brand-bound key is pinned to its own brand (may be omitted; another brand → 403); an account-wide key must name one.
profileNoOnly the fields sent are changed. Unknown fields are a 422.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Added

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Goes well beyond the annotations: discloses that only sent fields change, that nested voice/colors/fonts are preserved unless passed, that every change is audited against the connection, the required `write` scope, and the underlying PATCH endpoint. The audit and permission notes are exactly the operational context annotations (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false) cannot convey.

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?

Front-loaded with a scope/type tag, then purpose, example, partial-update semantics, use case, permissions, and audit note in a tight sequence. The trailing PATCH endpoint reference is short and useful for debugging; no sentence is filler.

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 5-parameter mutation with nested objects and no output schema, the definition covers scoping, permissions, partial-update behavior, and the colors replacement caveat. It does not indicate what the response contains (updated profile vs. acknowledgement), which is the only meaningful gap given no output schema exists.

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 cross-parameter meaning the schema does not: that the call is a partial merge by default while the colors block is a wholesale replacement of the stored palette. That merge-vs-replace distinction is the main hazard in this schema and is called out in prose.

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 and resource ('Fills in a brand's profile'), gives a concrete payload example, and distinguishes itself from brand_profile_get and brand_business_details_update by describing partial-write semantics. An agent can tell immediately this is a write that mutates selected fields.

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 names the motivating use case ('clear list_brands setup items such as hasWebsite') and the authorization gate (owners, admins and editors only). It does not explicitly name the sibling to use instead when the intent is read-only (brand_profile_get) or business-details editing (brand_business_details_update), so it stops short of full when/when-not routing.

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

All flayr 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