Skip to main content
Glama

edubase_patch_organization_department

Idempotent

Update an organization's department details, including name, parent, and leaders. Changed permission levels are applied to every member of the department.

Instructions

Update department of an organization. Changed permissions are applied to every member of the department.

Input Schema

TableJSON 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_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. Addedv1.2.17

TDQS

A3.5/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, and idempotentHint=true. The description adds one useful behavioral detail: permission changes propagate to all department members. However, it does not mention other potential side effects (e.g., partial vs full update, required permission level) beyond what annotations imply.

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?

The description is two sentences, front-loaded with the primary action and immediately followed by the key side effect. No wasted words, well-structured.

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 complex tool with 9 parameters and no output schema, the description is minimal but the schema covers all parameters. It does not explicitly state that only provided fields are updated (patch semantics), but this is implied by the name and idempotentHint. The description does highlight the most critical side effect (permission propagation), making it sufficient for an agent to use it correctly.

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%, so each parameter already has a description. The tool description adds no parameter-specific meaning beyond the schema, which meets the baseline for high coverage.

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 clearly states the action (update) and the resource (department of an organization), which is specific and distinct from sibling tools like post (create), delete, or get. It also adds a clarifying side-effect sentence that reinforces the scope.

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?

There is no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as edubase_post_organization_department or edubase_delete_organization_department. The description only states what it does without indicating prerequisites, exclusions, or selection criteria.

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