Skip to main content
Glama

Update Fhrp_group_assignment

netbox_update_fhrp_group_assignment
DestructiveIdempotent

Update an existing FHRP group assignment in NetBox by specifying the numeric ID and only the fields to change. Omitted fields remain unchanged.

Instructions

Update an existing fhrp_group_assignment in NetBox (PATCH semantics — only provided fields are changed).

Supply the numeric 'id' and only the fields you want to change. Omitting a field leaves it unchanged.

Returns: Markdown summary of the updated object (default) or JSON with the full NetBox response.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYesNumeric id of the fhrp_group_assignment to update.
tagsNoOptional array of tag slugs to apply to the object.
groupNo
priorityNo
interface_idNo
custom_fieldsNoOptional object of custom-field slugs -> values. Only include fields defined on your NetBox instance.
interface_typeNo
response_formatNoOutput format: 'markdown' (default, human-readable) or 'json' (full structured payload). Use 'json' when chaining follow-up tool calls.markdown
Behavior4/5

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

Discloses PATCH semantics (only provided fields changed) and output format, adding context beyond annotations. No contradiction with annotations.

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?

Very concise: one sentence for purpose, one for usage, then return formats. Front-loaded and no wasted words.

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

Completeness4/5

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

Covers key aspects (update semantics, required id, optional fields, output options) but lacks details on return structure and does not mention prerequisites like object existence.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters2/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 50%, and the description does not describe undocumented parameters (group, priority, interface_id, interface_type), failing to compensate for missing schema details.

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 clearly states the verb 'Update', the resource 'fhrp_group_assignment', and specifies PATCH semantics, distinguishing it from create/delete siblings.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

Provides clear instructions on how to use (supply id and fields to change) and output format options, but does not explicitly exclude use cases or compare with alternatives.

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/ZenixSolutions/netbox-mcp-server'

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