@createworker/mcp

Official

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

Update worker

worker_update

Update a worker's name or status to keep worker information current. Specify worker ID and optionally set new name or status (ACTIVE, PAUSED, ARCHIVED).

Instructions

Update a worker's name and/or status.

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": {
      "workerId": "<workerId>"
    },
    "name": "worker_update"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`name`	No
`status`	No
`workerId`	Yes	the worker id

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.0Jun 30, 2026

TDQS

C2.9/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

No annotations provided. Description discloses only the basic update capability without detailing side effects, idempotency, permissions, or behavior for missing parameters.

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?

A single, clear sentence that front-loads the verb and resource with no unnecessary words.

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?

Given no output schema and no annotations, the description omits return value details, error conditions, and any behavioral context beyond the basic update action.

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?

The description clarifies that 'name' and 'status' are the updatable fields, adding context beyond the schema. However, it does not explain the meaning of status enum values or constraints on name.

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?

The description clearly states the action (update) and resource (worker) and lists the updatable attributes (name and/or status). It distinguishes from sibling tools like worker_create and worker_delete, but lacks domain-specific context.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as worker_create or worker_get. No prerequisites or exclusions mentioned.

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