Skip to main content
Glama
OrionPotter

Meilisearch MCP Server

by OrionPotter

update-faceting

Modify faceting settings in a Meilisearch index to control how search results are categorized and filtered for better user navigation.

Instructions

Update the faceting setting

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
indexUidYesUnique identifier of the index
valueYesJSON value for the setting

Implementation Reference

  • Handler function that executes the update-faceting tool. Parses the input value as JSON and performs a PUT request to update the faceting settings in Meilisearch.
      async ({ indexUid, value }) => {
        try {
          // Parse the value string to ensure it's valid JSON
          const parsedValue = JSON.parse(value);
          
          const response = await apiClient.put(`/indexes/${indexUid}/settings/${endpoint}`, parsedValue);
          return {
            content: [{ type: "text", text: JSON.stringify(response.data, null, 2) }],
          };
        } catch (error) {
          return createErrorResponse(error);
        }
      }
    );
  • Input schema for the update tools, including update-faceting, using Zod to validate indexUid and value parameters.
    {
      indexUid: z.string().describe("Unique identifier of the index"),
      value: z.string().describe("JSON value for the setting"),
    },
  • Specific configuration object in the updateSettingsTools array used to register the update-faceting tool.
    {
      name: "update-faceting",
      endpoint: "faceting",
      description: "Update the faceting setting",
    },
  • Loop that dynamically registers all update-specific tools, including 'update-faceting', by calling server.tool with the configuration from the array.
    updateSettingsTools.forEach(({ name, endpoint, description }) => {
      server.tool(
        name,
        description,
        {
          indexUid: z.string().describe("Unique identifier of the index"),
          value: z.string().describe("JSON value for the setting"),
        },
        async ({ indexUid, value }) => {
          try {
            // Parse the value string to ensure it's valid JSON
            const parsedValue = JSON.parse(value);
            
            const response = await apiClient.put(`/indexes/${indexUid}/settings/${endpoint}`, parsedValue);
            return {
              content: [{ type: "text", text: JSON.stringify(response.data, null, 2) }],
            };
          } catch (error) {
            return createErrorResponse(error);
          }
        }
      );
    });
  • src/index.ts:67-67 (registration)
    Invocation of registerSettingsTools on the main MCP server instance, which in turn registers the update-faceting tool.
    registerSettingsTools(server);
Behavior1/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. 'Update' implies a mutation operation, but the description doesn't disclose any behavioral traits: it doesn't mention permissions required, whether changes are reversible, rate limits, error conditions, or what happens to existing settings. This is inadequate for a mutation tool with zero annotation coverage.

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?

The description is extremely concise with just four words. It's front-loaded with the core action ('Update'), though this brevity comes at the cost of completeness. There's zero wasted language or redundancy.

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?

Given that this is a mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain what faceting is, what the update does, what the expected outcome is, or how it fits with sibling tools. For a tool that modifies system settings, this minimal description leaves critical gaps for an agent to understand and use it correctly.

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?

The input schema has 100% description coverage, with both parameters ('indexUid' and 'value') clearly documented in the schema. The description adds no additional meaning about parameters beyond what's in the schema (e.g., it doesn't explain what 'value' should contain or provide examples). With high schema coverage, the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose2/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description 'Update the faceting setting' is a tautology that essentially restates the tool name 'update-faceting'. It doesn't specify what 'faceting' means in this context or what resource is being updated. While it includes a verb ('Update'), it lacks specificity about what faceting entails compared to sibling tools like 'get-faceting' or 'reset-faceting'.

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

Usage Guidelines1/5

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

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention prerequisites (e.g., needing an existing index), when not to use it, or how it differs from related tools like 'reset-faceting' or 'get-faceting'. This leaves the agent with no context for tool selection among the many sibling tools.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/OrionPotter/iflow-mcp_meilisearch-ts-mcp'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server