Skip to main content
Glama

Update Virtual_circuit

netbox_update_virtual_circuit
DestructiveIdempotent

Update a virtual circuit in NetBox by specifying its ID and fields to change. Fields not provided remain unchanged.

Instructions

Update an existing virtual_circuit 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 virtual_circuit to update.
cidNo
tagsNoOptional array of tag slugs to apply to the object.
typeNo
statusNo
tenantNo
commentsNo
descriptionNo
custom_fieldsNoOptional object of custom-field slugs -> values. Only include fields defined on your NetBox instance.
response_formatNoOutput format: 'markdown' (default, human-readable) or 'json' (full structured payload). Use 'json' when chaining follow-up tool calls.markdown
provider_accountNo
provider_networkNo
Behavior3/5

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

Description adds PATCH semantics and response format info, but annotations already provide mutation and idempotency hints. No contradiction.

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?

Brief, well-structured paragraphs. No unnecessary info, but could be more skimmable.

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?

With 12 parameters and no output schema, description provides minimal context. Lacks details on return structure and field descriptions.

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?

Low schema coverage (33%) and description does not elaborate on parameter meanings beyond the schema, missing opportunity to clarify fields like cid, type, status.

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?

Clearly states verb 'update' and resource 'virtual_circuit'. Specifies PATCH semantics, distinguishing 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 Guidelines3/5

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

Provides guidance on how to use (supply id and only fields to change) but lacks explicit when-to-use vs alternatives like create or delete.

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