Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
EduBase

EduBase MCP Server

Official
by EduBase
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

edubase_patch_organization_department

Idempotent

Updates an organization department's details and permission levels, applying changes to department members while preserving custom member permissions.

Instructions

Update department of an organization. Changed permissions are applied to the members of the department, except for the ones with custom permission levels.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idNoexternal unique department identifier, empty string removes it
titleNonew name of the department, must be unique within the organization
parentNoname (or external identifier) of the parent department, empty string moves the department to the root level, the department itself or a department below it cannot be the parent
leadersNocomma-separated list of user identification strings of the leaders (must be members of the organization, maximum 5), replaces the current leaders, empty string removes every leader
departmentYesname of the department (or its external identifier if no department has this name)
organizationYesorganization identification string
permission_resetNoreset the custom permission levels of the members, so every member follows the permission levels of the department (default: false)
permission_contentNopermission level to contents in organization given to the members (none / view / report / control / modify / grant / admin)
permission_membersNopermission level to members in organization given to the members (none / department / organization)
permission_organizationNopermission level to organization given to the members (member / teacher / reporter / supervisor / admin)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv2.0.9
    • addedInput schema / properties / permission_reset
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "reset the custom permission levels of the members, so every member follows the permission levels of the department (default: false)",
+  "type": "boolean"
+}
  2. Addedv1.2.17

TDQS

B3.4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare it as a non-destructive, idempotent mutation, so the description needn't restate safety. It adds genuinely new information: permission changes cascade to department members except those on custom permission levels, which an agent could not infer from the schema. It is silent on whether unspecified fields are left untouched, which matters for a PATCH.

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 sentences, front-loaded with the action and followed by the one non-obvious behavioral caveat. Nothing is redundant, though the cascade sentence could be tightened slightly.

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?

With 10 parameters and no output schema, the description leaves the PATCH contract implicit — whether omitted fields remain unchanged or whether the whole department definition is replaced. The permission-propagation note is valuable, but the update semantics an agent most needs are missing.

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% and every parameter, including the permission enums and permission_reset semantics, is documented there. The description adds no parameter-level meaning beyond what the schema already provides, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 and resource ("Update department of an organization"), which distinguishes it from the create/delete/get department siblings. It does not explicitly differentiate itself from the sibling patch tools (edubase_patch_organization, edubase_patch_organization_job), but the resource is unambiguous.

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 indication of when to use this versus edubase_post_organization_department or edubase_get_organization_department, and no prerequisites (e.g., required permissions, that the department must already exist). Usage is only inferable from the verb.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools