Skip to main content
Glama
ProofHoldings

@proof-holdings/mcp-server

Official
by ProofHoldings
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Hybrid

update_profile

Destructive

Modify a profile's display name, bio, theme, custom links, email branding, and verification settings by ID.

Instructions

Update a profile by ID. Supports changing display info, email branding (theme, support email), theme, custom links, and verification display settings.

ACCESS: needs a Proof account. Set PROOF_API_KEY and restart this server, then call this tool again. start_login does NOT open this tool.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
bioNoProfile bio
themeNoProfile theme settings
is_publicNoWhether the profile is publicly visible
avatar_urlNoAvatar (base64 or URL, null to remove)
is_primaryNoSet as primary profile
profile_idYesProfile ID
email_themeNoTheme of this project's emails
is_businessNoWhether this is a business profile
custom_linksNoCustom links (max 20)
display_nameNoDisplay name
business_nameNoBusiness name
support_emailNoSupport email this project's messages show (null to remove)
show_proof_channelsNoShow proof channels on public profile
show_verification_datesNoShow verification dates on public profile

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changedv1.7.0
    • addedInput schema / properties / email_theme
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Theme of this project's emails",
+  "enum": [
+    "dark",
+    "light"
+  ],
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / support_email
      Added value: +{
+  "anyOf": [
+    {
+      "anyOf": [
+        {
+          "not": {}
+        },
+        {
+          "format": "email",
+          "maxLength": 254,
+          "type": "string"
+        }
+      ],
+      "description": "Support email this project's messages show"
+    },
+    {
+      "type": "null"
+    }
+  ],
+  "description": "Support email this project's messages show (null to remove)"
+}
  2. First observedv1.1.0

TDQS

B3.4/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, so the write risk is conveyed structurally. The description adds genuinely useful auth context (Proof account required, PROOF_API_KEY, start_login won't help), but it never clarifies what the destructive update overwrites, whether omitted fields are preserved, or how the avatar/support_email null-to-remove semantics behave.

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 capability statement is a single tight sentence and the ACCESS note is clearly separated and front-loaded. Slight overhead from repeating field groups already visible in the schema, but nothing is wasted.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a 14-parameter mutation tool with no output schema, the definition covers the auth prerequisite and the field categories but omits what happens on partial updates, whether changes are reversible, and any side effects. The ACCESS note helps but the destructive semantics remain underspecified.

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 14 parameters are already documented with descriptions, formats, and constraints. The description groups them into themes (display info, email branding, theme, custom links, verification display) but adds no syntax or format detail beyond what the schema provides, so the 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 opens with a specific verb+resource ("Update a profile by ID") and enumerates the field groups that can be changed, so the agent knows exactly what the tool mutates. It does not, however, distinguish itself from siblings like update_my_profile or update_profile_proofs, which would require different scoping rules.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

Usage is only implied: "by ID" suggests it targets an arbitrary profile rather than the caller's own, and the ACCESS block tells you the prerequisite (a Proof account / PROOF_API_KEY) and that start_login does not unlock it. It never explicitly states when to prefer this over update_my_profile, set_primary_profile, or update_profile_proofs.

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