Skip to main content
Glama
Misar-AI

MisarBlog MCP Server

by Misar-AI
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Hybrid

Update article

update_article
DestructiveIdempotent

Modify an existing Misar.Blog article or draft by updating only the title, Markdown body, or tags you provide; omitted fields remain unchanged.

Instructions

Update the title, body, or tags of an existing article or draft. Only the fields you pass are changed; omitted fields keep their current values.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYesArticle or draft ID
tagsNoReplace the tag list
titleNoNew title
body_markdownNoNew body in Markdown

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed4 schema fields changedv5.1.3
    • changedInput schema / properties / body_markdown / description
      Previous value: -"Replacement body as Markdown. Replaces the whole body, not a patch."New value: +"New body in Markdown"
    • changedInput schema / properties / id / description
      Previous value: -"Article or draft id from a listing tool. This is the id, not the slug."New value: +"Article or draft ID"
    • changedInput schema / properties / tags / description
      Previous value: -"Replacement tag list, up to 10. Overwrites the existing tags entirely."New value: +"Replace the tag list"
    • changedInput schema / properties / title / description
      Previous value: -"Replacement headline."New value: +"New title"
  2. Changed4 schema fields changedv5.1.0
    • changedInput schema / properties / body_markdown / description
      Previous value: -"New body in Markdown"New value: +"Replacement body as Markdown. Replaces the whole body, not a patch."
    • changedInput schema / properties / id / description
      Previous value: -"Article or draft ID"New value: +"Article or draft id from a listing tool. This is the id, not the slug."
    • changedInput schema / properties / tags / description
      Previous value: -"Replace the tag list"New value: +"Replacement tag list, up to 10. Overwrites the existing tags entirely."
    • changedInput schema / properties / title / description
      Previous value: -"New title"New value: +"Replacement headline."
  3. First observedv2.0.0

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare the mutation profile (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=true, idempotentHint=true). The description adds genuinely useful PATCH semantics – "Only the fields you pass are changed; omitted fields keep their current values" – which the annotations do not convey. It still omits that tags are replaced wholesale rather than merged, but this is a solid addition beyond structured data.

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 tight sentences, zero filler, with the partial-update contract front-loaded immediately after the action statement. Every clause earns its place.

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?

For a 4-parameter mutation tool with 100% schema coverage, no output schema, and annotations covering the safety profile, the description covers the essentials. It is slightly short on prerequisites and does not clarify that tag updates are destructive replacements, but nothing critical for correct invocation is missing.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents id, title, body_markdown, and tags with their constraints. The description restates the field names but adds no format, length, or replacement-syntax detail beyond what the schema provides. Baseline 3 applies.

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 gives a specific verb and resource ("Update the title, body, or tags of an existing article or draft") and even enumerates the mutable fields. The word "existing" implicitly separates it from create_draft, but it never names a sibling tool, so it stops short of full differentiation.

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 guidance on when to choose this tool over create_draft or publish_article, nor any prerequisites (e.g. authentication or draft-vs-published constraints). Usage is only implied by the phrase "existing article or draft."

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