Cyoda Calculation Node MCP

Official

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

entity_update_entity_tool

Update an existing entity by specifying its model, technical UUID, and the updated data. Optionally set a version number.

Instructions

Update an existing entity.

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": {
      "entity_model": "<entity_model>",
      "entity_id": "<entity_id>",
      "entity_data": "<entity_data>"
    },
    "name": "entity_update_entity_tool"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`entity_model`	Yes	The type of entity to update
`entity_id`	Yes	The technical UUID of the entity
`entity_data`	Yes	The updated data for the entity
`entity_version`	No	The entity model version	1

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.7May 26, 2026

TDQS

B3/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

No annotations provided; the description does not disclose whether updates are partial or full, required permissions, or side effects. The description carries the full burden but fails to provide behavioral details.

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 description is a single sentence, which is concise but lacks any structure or emphasis; it could be considered under-specified rather than efficient.

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?

With 4 parameters, an output schema, and sibling tools, the description is too minimal; it does not explain expected updates, return value, or error scenarios.

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 coverage is 100%; the description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema, so baseline 3 is appropriate despite no param-specific elaboration.

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?

The description 'Update an existing entity' uses a clear verb and resource, distinguishing it from sibling tools like entity_create_entity_tool and entity_delete_entity_tool.

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; no context about prerequisites, limitations, or when not to use it.

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

Deploy Server