Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Karbon MCP Server

Karbon MCP Server

by Mad-Man-Dan
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Hybrid

Update work schedule

update_work_schedule

Update a work schedule's end date or assignee. Changing the assignee reassigns all not-yet-started work items the schedule generated.

Instructions

Update a work schedule (partial via PATCH). The API only supports changing the end date and the assignee here. Note: changing AssigneeUserKey reassigns every not-yet-started work item the schedule has generated — confirm with the user first.

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": {
      "workScheduleKey": "<workScheduleKey>"
    },
    "name": "update_work_schedule"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
AssigneeUserKeyNo
ScheduleEndDateNoISO 8601 date to stop the schedule; pass null to clear the end date (run forever)
workScheduleKeyYesThe Karbon WorkScheduleKey to update

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv0.2.3

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. Discloses partial update via PATCH, limited supported fields, and side effect of reassigning not-yet-started work items on assignee change. Does not cover authentication or rate limits.

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?

Two sentences, each adding essential information: purpose, scope, and caution. No unnecessary words, well-structured.

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?

Adequately describes function, limitations, and side effects for a simple update tool. No output schema, but response type is likely standard update confirmation; missing error handling info but not critical.

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

Parameters4/5

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

67% schema coverage. Description adds meaning for AssigneeUserKey (side effect) and reinforces ScheduleEndDate behavior (null to clear). WorkScheduleKey not elaborated, but compensates for missing schema description on AssigneeUserKey.

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?

Clearly states the action (Update) and resource (work schedule), with partial via PATCH. Distinguishes from sibling tools like create_work_schedule and get_work_schedule.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

Explicitly mentions that only end date and assignee can be changed, implying use for these fields only. Lacks explicit comparison to alternatives but provides clear context.

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