Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
nextcloud-agent

nextcloud-agent

by Knuckles-Team
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Remote

Rename conversation

nextcloud_rename_conversation
Idempotent

Rename a Nextcloud Talk conversation by token to update its display name via the Nextcloud OCS API.

Instructions

Rename one conversation.

PUT /ocs/v2.php/apps/spreed/api/v4/room/{token}

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": {
      "token": "<token>",
      "name": "<name>"
    },
    "name": "nextcloud_rename_conversation"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameYes
tokenYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv3.0.0

TDQS

C2.9/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare the operation is non-read-only, idempotent, non-destructive, and open-world. The description adds only the single-conversation target and PUT endpoint; it does not mention permissions, participant effects, or validation rules, but annotations carry the safety profile.

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 front-loaded and free of fluff, but the raw PUT endpoint is of limited value to an agent and the brevity contributes to under-specification.

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 two-parameter mutation with no output schema, the annotations cover safety but the description leaves both parameters undocumented and omits permission or side-effect details. It is too thin to be complete despite the simple operation.

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 coverage is 0%, and the description does not define 'token' or 'name'. The endpoint string hints that {token} identifies the conversation, but 'name' as the new name is only implied by the tool name.

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 states a specific verb ('Rename') and resource ('one conversation'), so the agent can distinguish it from create/delete/get conversation siblings. It does not explicitly name alternatives, but the operation 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?

No when-to-use guidance, prerequisites, or alternatives are provided. The agent must infer that this is for changing an existing conversation's name rather than creating or deleting one.

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