Skip to main content
Glama
Panelica

panelica-mcp

Official
by Panelica
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Hybrid

panelica_accounts_patch_v1_accounts_id

Update account details by ID to apply changes to an existing hosting account. Requires accounts:write scope and modifies server state.

Instructions

Update account

HTTP: PATCH /v1/accounts/:id Category: Accounts Required scopes: accounts:write Mutating: changes server state.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYesPath parameter: id
bodyNoRequest body (application/json). Schema not statically declared — see API docs.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed4 schema fields changedv0.2.1
    • addedInput schema / properties / body / additionalProperties
      Added value: +true
    • changedInput schema / properties / body / description
      Previous value: -"Request body (application/json)"New value: +"Request body (application/json). Schema not statically declared — see API docs."
    • removedInput schema / properties / body / properties
      Removed value: -{
-  "email": {
-    "description": "",
-    "type": "string"
-  },
-  "full_name": {
-    "description": "",
-    "type": "string"
-  },
-  "ip_address_ids": {
-    "description": "IP addresses to assign to user",
-    "type": "string"
-  },
-  "password": {
-    "description": "Optional: Update password if provided",
-    "type": "string"
-  },
-  "plan_id": {
-    "description": "",
-    "type": "string"
-  },
-  "role": {
-    "description": "NEW: Allow role updates (with RBAC checks)",
-    "type": "string"
-  },
-  "status": {
-    "description": "",
-    "type": "string"
-  }
-}
    • removedInput schema / properties / body / required
      Removed value: -[]
  2. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

The description explicitly states the required scope (accounts:write) and labels the operation as one that changes server state, adding auth and side-effect context beyond the readOnlyHint=false annotation. It is consistent with the idempotentHint and destructiveHint flags, though it does not describe response behavior or possible irreversible effects.

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 compact: a one-line purpose followed by HTTP method/path, category, required scope, and mutation flag. Every line carries distinct information and there is no filler.

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 mutating PATCH endpoint with an open body schema and no output schema, the description is too thin: it never says which account fields can be updated, what the request body should contain, or what response to expect. The schema itself defers body shape to API docs, leaving the agent without enough information to construct a valid call from this definition alone.

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?

Input schema coverage is 100% (id as path parameter and body as a JSON object), so the description does not need to restate them. However, the body parameter is open-ended and the description adds no field-level meaning; it just repeats the path pattern. This is acceptable but not additive.

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?

The description opens with 'Update account' followed by 'HTTP: PATCH /v1/accounts/:id', giving a clear verb-resource pair and making the operation distinct from sibling create, get, and delete account endpoints. The resource and action are unambiguous even before considering the tool name.

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 or when-not-to-use guidance is provided. The description does not mention that this endpoint is for general account modifications, nor does it direct an agent to sibling tools for password changes, suspension, or impersonation. An agent must infer the appropriate situation from the verb alone.

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