Skip to main content
Glama
FromSmall2Big

Apollo.io MCP Server

update_account

Modify existing Apollo.io account details like name, domain, or phone number by providing the account ID and specific fields to update.

Instructions

Update an existing account in Apollo.io.

This tool updates account information with the provided data. Only specified fields will be updated.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
account_idYes
nameNo
domainNo
phone_numberNo

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Implementation Reference

  • The main handler function for the 'update_account' MCP tool. Decorated with @mcp.tool() for automatic registration and schema inference. Implements updating an Apollo.io account via PUT API request with optional fields: name, domain, phone_number.
    @mcp.tool()
    async def update_account(
        account_id: str,
        name: Optional[str] = None,
        domain: Optional[str] = None,
        phone_number: Optional[str] = None
    ) -> Dict[str, Any]:
        """
        Update an existing account in Apollo.io.
        
        This tool updates account information with the provided data.
        Only specified fields will be updated.
        """
        endpoint = f"/v1/accounts/{account_id}"
        
        data = {}
        if name:
            data["name"] = name
        if domain:
            data["domain"] = domain
        if phone_number:
            data["phone_number"] = phone_number
        
        if not data:
            return {"error": "At least one field must be provided for update"}
        
        try:
            result = await apollo_client.make_request("PUT", endpoint, data=data)
            return result
        except httpx.HTTPStatusError as e:
            return {"error": f"API request failed: {e.response.status_code} {e.response.text}"}
        except Exception as e:
            return {"error": f"Request failed: {str(e)}"}
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It mentions 'Only specified fields will be updated' which adds some context about partial updates, but fails to address critical aspects like authentication requirements, rate limits, error handling, or what the update operation actually does to the account data.

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?

The description is appropriately brief with three sentences that get straight to the point. Each sentence adds value: establishing context, stating the action, and providing a key behavioral note about partial updates. No wasted words or redundancy.

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?

For a mutation tool with 4 parameters, 0% schema coverage, no annotations, but with an output schema, the description is insufficient. It doesn't explain the update semantics, error conditions, or relationship to sibling tools. While the output schema may cover return values, the description lacks critical context about the operation itself.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters2/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

With 0% schema description coverage and 4 parameters, the description provides no information about parameter meanings beyond what's in the schema titles. It doesn't explain what 'account_id' identifies, what format 'domain' should be in, or how 'phone_number' should be structured, leaving significant gaps in parameter understanding.

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 ('account in Apollo.io'), making the purpose understandable. However, it doesn't differentiate from sibling tools like 'create_account' beyond the basic verb distinction, lacking specificity about what makes this update operation unique.

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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'create_account' or 'get_account_by_id'. There's no mention of prerequisites, error conditions, or typical use cases, leaving the agent without contextual usage direction.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/FromSmall2Big/Apollo-MCP'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server