Notion MCP Server

update-block

Modify content or archive status of Notion blocks to keep information current and organized.

Instructions

Update a block's content or archive status

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`block_id`	Yes	ID of the block to update
`block_type`	Yes	The type of block (paragraph, heading_1, to_do, etc.)
`content`	Yes	The content for the block based on its type
`archived`	No	Whether to archive (true) or restore (false) the block

Implementation Reference

server.js:567-592 (handler)

The handler logic for the 'update-block' tool. It constructs update parameters using the dynamic block_type key for content, optionally sets archived status, calls notion.blocks.update, and returns the JSON response.

else if (name === "update-block") {
  let { block_id, block_type, content, archived } = args;
  
  // Remove dashes if present in block_id
  block_id = block_id.replace(/-/g, "");

  const updateParams = {
    block_id,
    [block_type]: content,
  };

  if (archived !== undefined) {
    updateParams.archived = archived;
  }

  const response = await notion.blocks.update(updateParams);

  return {
    content: [
      {
        type: "text",
        text: JSON.stringify(response, null, 2),
      },
    ],
  };
}

server.js:242-267 (schema)

Input schema definition for the 'update-block' tool in the tools/list response.

{
  name: "update-block",
  description: "Update a block's content or archive status",
  inputSchema: {
    type: "object",
    properties: {
      block_id: {
        type: "string",
        description: "ID of the block to update"
      },
      block_type: {
        type: "string",
        description: "The type of block (paragraph, heading_1, to_do, etc.)"
      },
      content: {
        type: "object",
        description: "The content for the block based on its type"
      },
      archived: {
        type: "boolean",
        description: "Whether to archive (true) or restore (false) the block"
      }
    },
    required: ["block_id", "block_type", "content"]
  }
},

server.js:242-267 (registration)

The tool 'update-block' is registered/listed in the tools/list handler response.

{
  name: "update-block",
  description: "Update a block's content or archive status",
  inputSchema: {
    type: "object",
    properties: {
      block_id: {
        type: "string",
        description: "ID of the block to update"
      },
      block_type: {
        type: "string",
        description: "The type of block (paragraph, heading_1, to_do, etc.)"
      },
      content: {
        type: "object",
        description: "The content for the block based on its type"
      },
      archived: {
        type: "boolean",
        description: "Whether to archive (true) or restore (false) the block"
      }
    },
    required: ["block_id", "block_type", "content"]
  }
},

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Addedv1.0.0Jan 2, 2026

TDQS

C2.9/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states 'Update a block's content or archive status', which implies a mutation operation, but doesn't cover critical aspects like permissions required, whether changes are reversible, error handling, or response format. This is a significant gap for a mutation tool.

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 a single, efficient sentence that directly states the tool's purpose without unnecessary words. It's front-loaded and every part earns its place, making it highly concise and well-structured.

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 the complexity of a mutation tool with 4 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It lacks details on behavioral traits, error conditions, and what the tool returns, which are crucial for safe and effective use. The description should do more to compensate for missing structured data.

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 all parameters thoroughly. The description mentions 'content or archive status', which aligns with the 'content' and 'archived' parameters in the schema, but adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema provides. Baseline 3 is appropriate when schema does the heavy lifting.

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 clearly states the verb 'Update' and the resource 'a block's content or archive status', making the purpose unambiguous. However, it doesn't differentiate from sibling tools like 'update-page' or 'update-database', which have similar update operations on different resources.

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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention prerequisites like needing a block ID, nor does it compare with siblings like 'append-block-children' for adding content or 'get-block' for reading. Usage context is implied but not explicit.

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

Deploy Server