huly-mcp-selfhost

update_milestone

Update milestone details—including name, target date, status, and Markdown description—within a specified Huly project; set description to null to clear it.

Instructions

Update a milestone (name, target date, status, description)

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": {
      "workspace": "<workspace>",
      "projectIdentifier": "<projectIdentifier>",
      "label": "<label>"
    },
    "name": "update_milestone"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`label`	Yes
`status`	No
`newLabel`	No
`workspace`	Yes
`targetDate`	No	ISO date
`description`	No	Markdown; null clears
`projectIdentifier`	Yes	Project key

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv3.5.1Nov 12, 2026

TDQS

C2.6/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

Annotations only supply destructiveHint=false, so the description carries the rest of the burden and does not deliver: it never states whether this is a partial patch (only supplied fields changed) or a full replacement, what identifies the target milestone, or what a successful response contains. For a mutation tool with 7 parameters and near-empty annotation coverage, this is a significant gap.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The single parenthetical sentence is front-loaded and free of padding, which is good. However, brevity here crosses into under-specification: the one line spent listing field names could have been spent resolving the label/newLabel question instead.

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?

With 7 parameters, 3 required, 43% schema coverage, and no output schema, the definition should do considerably more: clarify how the milestone is addressed, state patch semantics, and note the null-clears behavior for description. An agent reading only the description could reasonably call this with `newLabel` and no `label` and be surprised by the validation error.

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?

Schema description coverage is only 43%, and the description's field list actively muddies the key ambiguity: it says "name" while the schema has both `label` (required, presumably the identifier) and `newLabel` (the rename target). The description does nothing to disambiguate these two, nor does it explain that `newLabel` without `label` is meaningless. It only echoes field names already visible in the schema.

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 names a specific verb and resource ("Update a milestone") and enumerates the mutable fields, so an agent can tell it apart from create_milestone or get_milestone. It stops short of distinguishing this from sibling update_* tools in any meaningful way, 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?

There is no when-to-use guidance: nothing says this should be used for editing an existing milestone rather than create_milestone for new ones, nor any prerequisite such as needing a workspace and project key to locate the milestone. The agent must infer usage entirely 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