threatlocker-mcp

computer_update_maintenance_mode

Modify maintenance mode settings for a computer to control update schedules and prevent disruptions.

Instructions

Updates a device's maintenance mode settings.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "body": "<body>"
    },
    "name": "computer_update_maintenance_mode"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`body`	Yes	Request body.
`organization_id`	No	Override the default organization (ManagedOrganizationId header).
`override_organization_id`	No	Optional OverrideManagedOrganizationId header.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.2.1Jun 14, 2026

TDQS

C2.9/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations, the description must fully disclose behavioral traits. It only says 'updates', which is vague. No mention of side effects, required permissions, or what 'maintenance mode settings' entails, leaving the agent underinformed.

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 description is a single concise sentence with no wasted words. However, it could benefit from slightly more structure, e.g., separating purpose from behavior.

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 (3 parameters, nested objects, no output schema, no annotations), the description is too brief. It does not explain return values, error conditions, or how settings are updated, leaving significant gaps.

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 for top-level parameters, but the tool description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema. The complex nested 'body' object is not explained in the description, but schema descriptions partially compensate.

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 'Updates a device's maintenance mode settings' is clear and specific about the verb and resource, but does not differentiate from sibling maintenance mode tools like 'maintenance_mode_end_by_id' or 'maintenance_mode_update_end_date_time_for_specific_date'.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as other maintenance mode operations. The description lacks context about prerequisites or use cases.

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

Deploy Server