airtable-user-mcp

update_records

Update primitive and single-select cells in existing Airtable records by column ID, with per-row isolation for targeted edits. Array fields such as multi-select, links, and attachments are excluded.

Instructions

Update primitive / single-select cells of existing records via cellValuesByColumnId. (Array cells — multi-select, links, attachments — are not set here.) Per-row isolation.

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": {
      "appId": "<appId>",
      "tableId": "<tableId>",
      "updates": "<updates>"
    },
    "name": "update_records"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`appId`	Yes	The Airtable base/application ID
`debug`	No	When true, include raw Airtable response in output for diagnostics
`tableId`	Yes	The table ID containing the records
`updates`	Yes	Updates, each { rowId: "recXXX", cellValuesByColumnId: { "<fieldId>": <value> } }

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Addedv1.0.9Nov 7, 2026

TDQS

A3.6/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=false, so the safety profile is structured data. The description adds the cell-type constraint and 'Per-row isolation', which hints at partial-failure semantics, but that phrase is too terse to tell the agent whether a failing row aborts the batch or not.

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?

Two short sentences with the scope statement front-loaded and the exclusion in a parenthetical. 'Per-row isolation' is efficient but borders on cryptic, costing it the top mark.

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

Completeness3/5

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

For a mutation tool with no output schema, the definition covers what is written and what is excluded, but omits coexistence questions an agent needs: whether records must already exist, what happens on partial batch failure, and whether unspecified cells are left untouched.

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%, so appId, tableId, updates, and debug are already documented. The description echoes the cellValuesByColumnId shape but adds no format or validation detail beyond the schema, making the baseline 3 appropriate.

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

Purpose4/5

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

States a specific verb+resource ('Update primitive / single-select cells of existing records') and names the exact mechanism (cellValuesByColumnId), distinguishing it from create_records and update_field_config. It does not name the sibling that handles array cells, so differentiation is partial rather than complete.

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?

The parenthetical gives an explicit when-NOT: array cells (multi-select, links, attachments) 'are not set here.' That is real routing guidance, but it stops short of naming which tool to use instead, leaving the agent to search the sibling list.

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

Deploy Server