marzban-mcp

Update user

marzban_users_update

Partially update an existing Marzban user: modify only specified fields (expiry, proxies, limits, notes) and keep all other settings unchanged.

Instructions

Partially updates a user — only fields you provide are changed, everything else is left as-is. For status changes prefer marzban_users_activate/deactivate/hold (clearer intent, no need to know the raw status enum). For renewing an expiring/expired user prefer marzban_users_extend.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`note`	No
`expire`	No	e.g. "30d" or an absolute date. 0 means unlimited.
`proxies`	No	Protocol name -> settings, e.g. {"vless": {"id": "<uuid>"}} or {"shadowsocks": {}} to auto-generate credentials. Omit to leave unchanged on update. On create there is no server default — omitting this (without templateId) errors; provide at least one protocol with a matching inbound configured on the panel.
`inbounds`	No	Protocol name -> inbound tags to restrict this user to. Omit for all inbounds.
`username`	Yes
`dataLimit`	No	e.g. "10GB". 0 means unlimited.
`dataLimitResetStrategy`	No

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`note`	No
`admin`	No
`links`	No
`expire`	No
`status`	Yes
`proxies`	Yes
`inbounds`	No
`username`	Yes
`next_plan`	No
`online_at`	No
`created_at`	Yes
`data_limit`	No	data_limit can be 0 or greater
`used_traffic`	Yes
`sub_updated_at`	No
`on_hold_timeout`	No
`subscription_url`	No
`excluded_inbounds`	No
`auto_delete_in_days`	No
`sub_last_user_agent`	No
`lifetime_used_traffic`	No
`on_hold_expire_duration`	No
`data_limit_reset_strategy`	No		no_reset

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed6 schema fields changedv0.2.3Sep 7, 2026

changedInput schema / properties / proxies / description

Previous value: -"Protocol name -> settings, e.g. {\"vless\": {\"id\": \"<uuid>\"}}. Omit to leave unchanged (update) or use server defaults (create)."New value: +"Protocol name -> settings, e.g. {\"vless\": {\"id\": \"<uuid>\"}} or {\"shadowsocks\": {}} to auto-generate credentials. Omit to leave unchanged on update. On create there is no server default — omitting this (without templateId) errors; provide at least one protocol with a matching inbound configured on the panel."

removedOutput schema / properties / created_at / format
```
Removed value: -"date-time"
```

removedOutput schema / properties / created_at / pattern

Removed value: -"^(?:(?:\\d\\d[2468][048]|\\d\\d[13579][26]|\\d\\d0[48]|[02468][048]00|[13579][26]00)-02-29|\\d{4}-(?:(?:0[13578]|1[02])-(?:0[1-9]|[12]\\d|3[01])|(?:0[469]|11)-(?:0[1-9]|[12]\\d|30)|(?:02)-(?:0[1-9]|1\\d|2[0-8])))T(?:(?:[01]\\d|2[0-3]):[0-5]\\d(?::[0-5]\\d(?:\\.\\d+)?)?(?:Z|))$"

changedOutput schema / properties / on_hold_timeout / anyOf

Previous value: -[
-  {
-    "anyOf": [
-      {
-        "format": "date-time",
-        "pattern": "^(?:(?:\\d\\d[2468][048]|\\d\\d[13579][26]|\\d\\d0[48]|[02468][048]00|[13579][26]00)-02-29|\\d{4}-(?:(?:0[13578]|1[02])-(?:0[1-9]|[12]\\d|3[01])|(?:0[469]|11)-(?:0[1-9]|[12]\\d|30)|(?:02)-(?:0[1-9]|1\\d|2[0-8])))T(?:(?:[01]\\d|2[0-3]):[0-5]\\d(?::[0-5]\\d(?:\\.\\d+)?)?(?:Z|))$",
-        "type": "string"
-      },
-      {
-        "type": "null"
-      }
-    ]
-  },
-  {
-    "type": "null"
-  }
-]New value: +[
+  {
+    "type": "string"
+  },
+  {
+    "type": "null"
+  }
+]

changedOutput schema / properties / online_at / anyOf

Previous value: -[
-  {
-    "anyOf": [
-      {
-        "format": "date-time",
-        "pattern": "^(?:(?:\\d\\d[2468][048]|\\d\\d[13579][26]|\\d\\d0[48]|[02468][048]00|[13579][26]00)-02-29|\\d{4}-(?:(?:0[13578]|1[02])-(?:0[1-9]|[12]\\d|3[01])|(?:0[469]|11)-(?:0[1-9]|[12]\\d|30)|(?:02)-(?:0[1-9]|1\\d|2[0-8])))T(?:(?:[01]\\d|2[0-3]):[0-5]\\d(?::[0-5]\\d(?:\\.\\d+)?)?(?:Z|))$",
-        "type": "string"
-      },
-      {
-        "type": "null"
-      }
-    ]
-  },
-  {
-    "type": "null"
-  }
-]New value: +[
+  {
+    "type": "string"
+  },
+  {
+    "type": "null"
+  }
+]

changedOutput schema / properties / sub_updated_at / anyOf

Previous value: -[
-  {
-    "anyOf": [
-      {
-        "format": "date-time",
-        "pattern": "^(?:(?:\\d\\d[2468][048]|\\d\\d[13579][26]|\\d\\d0[48]|[02468][048]00|[13579][26]00)-02-29|\\d{4}-(?:(?:0[13578]|1[02])-(?:0[1-9]|[12]\\d|3[01])|(?:0[469]|11)-(?:0[1-9]|[12]\\d|30)|(?:02)-(?:0[1-9]|1\\d|2[0-8])))T(?:(?:[01]\\d|2[0-3]):[0-5]\\d(?::[0-5]\\d(?:\\.\\d+)?)?(?:Z|))$",
-        "type": "string"
-      },
-      {
-        "type": "null"
-      }
-    ]
-  },
-  {
-    "type": "null"
-  }
-]New value: +[
+  {
+    "type": "string"
+  },
+  {
+    "type": "null"
+  }
+]

First observedv0.2.2Sep 2, 2026

TDQS

A4.4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Beyond annotations (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false), the description discloses that updates are partial and non-destructive to omitted fields. It also clarifies that status changes via this tool would require raw enum knowledge, which is useful behavioral context not present in annotations.

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?

Three tight sentences: the first states the core behavior, the second and third route to siblings. No filler or repetition of schema details. The most important information is front-loaded.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

The description covers the critical usage nuance (partial update) and sibling routing for a complex nested-parameter tool. An output schema exists, so return values need no explanation. It does not discuss edge cases like proxy replacement semantics, but the schema's proxy description already covers some of that.

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 57%, with descriptions for expire, proxies, inbounds, and dataLimit. The description adds the crucial cross-cutting semantic that all parameters are optional and only provided ones change, but it does not individually clarify note or dataLimitResetStrategy beyond the schema. This is adequate but not fully compensating.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Partially updates a user'. It clearly defines the core behavior (only provided fields are changed) and distinguishes this tool from sibling tools by naming the specialized alternatives for status and renewal operations.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description explicitly tells the agent when to prefer marzban_users_activate/deactivate/hold and marzban_users_extend, with reasons. This is direct routing guidance that leaves little to inference and prevents misuse.

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

Deploy Server