Redmine MCP Server

update_user

Update an existing Redmine user's account details, including login, name, email, password, status, and admin privileges. Requires admin permissions.

Instructions

Updates an existing user. Requires admin privileges.

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": {
      "id": "<id>"
    },
    "name": "update_user"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`id`	Yes	Numeric user ID to update (required)
`login`	No	User login name
`firstname`	No	First name
`lastname`	No	Last name
`mail`	No	Email address
`password`	No	New password
`auth_source_id`	No	External authentication source ID. Set to null for local auth
`mail_notification`	No	Email notification preference: all, selected, only_my_events, only_assigned, only_owner, none
`must_change_passwd`	No	Force password change at next login
`generate_password`	No	Generate a random password automatically
`status`	No	User status: 1=active, 2=registered, 3=locked
`admin`	No	Whether the user has admin privileges
`language`	No	User language preference
`custom_fields`	No	Custom field values
`group_ids`	No	Group IDs to assign the user to. Admin-only. Replaces all current group memberships
`send_information`	No	Send account information email to the user

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.1.0May 31, 2026

TDQS

C2.9/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears full responsibility. It indicates mutation and a privilege requirement but lacks details on side effects (e.g., notification emails, password generation behavior, group membership replacement).

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 concise sentences with front-loaded information. No unnecessary words. Could be expanded slightly without losing conciseness.

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 tool with 16 parameters handling sensitive user updates, the description lacks critical context: no mention of return value, no hints on parameter interactions (e.g., password vs generate_password), and no explanation of the group_ids replacement behavior. Schema covers basics but description insufficient.

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% with detailed parameter descriptions. The tool description adds no extra parameter meaning, but the schema is thorough, earning a baseline 3.

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 ('Updates') and resource ('existing user'), making the purpose obvious. It implicitly distinguishes from create/delete tools but doesn't explicitly differentiate from 'update_my_account'.

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 only guidance is the admin privilege requirement. No information about when to use this tool versus alternatives like update_my_account, or any non-obvious prerequisites (e.g., user existence, permitted field combinations).

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

Deploy Server