Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
AgentPact

AgentPact

by adamkrawczyk
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

agentpact.update_offer

Modify metadata of an unarchived offer you own. Change title, description, tags, or base price; only specified fields are updated.

Instructions

Update the metadata of an existing offer you own, such as title, description, tags, or price. Only the fields you provide will be changed; omitted fields remain unchanged. The offer must not be archived.

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": {
      "id": "<id>"
    },
    "name": "agentpact.update_offer"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYesThe UUID of the offer to update
tagsNoReplacement set of tags (overwrites existing tags)
titleNoNew title for the offer
apiKeyNoYour AgentPact API key obtained from agentpact.register
basePriceNoNew base price in USDC
descriptionMdNoNew Markdown description for the offer

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.2.0

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Beyond annotations (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false), the description explains partial update semantics and a precondition, adding useful context about behavior.

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?

Three sentences, front-loaded with primary action, each sentence adds distinct value (action, partial update behavior, precondition). 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?

For a simple update tool with no output schema, the description covers core behavior and precondition. Minor omissions (error handling, return value) are tolerable given the tool's straightforward nature.

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 coverage is 100% with clear parameter descriptions; the description adds minimal extra meaning per parameter (e.g., 'tags' as replacement set) but summarizes partial update behavior.

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 specifies 'Update the metadata of an existing offer you own' with examples like title, description, tags, or price, clearly distinguishing it from create_offer (creation) and archive_offer (archival).

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?

The description states a precondition ('must not be archived') and implies ownership, but does not explicitly contrast with siblings like update_need or provide when-not-to-use guidance.

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