Skip to main content
Glama
alpacahq

alpaca-mcp-server

Official
by alpacahq
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Remote

update_watchlist_by_id

Update a watchlist by ID, replacing its symbols and name. Provide the complete symbol list to prevent removal of all assets.

Instructions

Update an existing watchlist. IMPORTANT: this replaces the entire watchlist. You must include the symbols parameter with the full list of desired symbols, otherwise all assets will be removed.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameNoThe new watchlist name.
symbolsNoList of asset symbols to include in the watchlist. The existing assets will be replaced with the new list.
watchlist_idYeswatchlist id

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed4 schema fields changedv2.3.2
    • changedInput schema / properties / name / description
      Previous value: -"The watchlist name."New value: +"The new watchlist name."
    • changedInput schema / properties / symbols / description
      Previous value: -"List of asset symbols to include in the watchlist."New value: +"List of asset symbols to include in the watchlist. The existing assets will be replaced with the new list."
    • removedInput schema / properties / symbols / items / nullable
      Removed value: -true
    • changedInput schema / properties / symbols / items / type
      Previous value: -"string"New value: +[
+  "string",
+  "null"
+]
  2. Addedv2.0.0

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior4/5

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 does this well by explicitly warning that the operation 'replaces the entire watchlist' and that omitting symbols 'will remove all assets'—critical destructive behavior an agent must know before invoking.

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 two sentences with no filler. The most important behavioral constraint is front-loaded in an 'IMPORTANT' warning, ensuring an agent notices it immediately.

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

Completeness5/5

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

For a moderate-complexity replacement operation, the description is complete. It covers the purpose, the destructive default behavior, and the critical parameter requirement. An output schema exists, so not describing return values is acceptable.

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

Parameters4/5

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

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds extra semantic value beyond the schema by warning that the symbols parameter must contain the full desired list and that omitting it leads to all assets being removed. This clarification is essential for correct invocation.

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 operation: 'Update an existing watchlist.' The important note that this 'replaces the entire watchlist' distinguishes it from sibling tools like add_asset_to_watchlist_by_id and remove_asset_from_watchlist_by_id, even though those alternatives aren't named.

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 implies its use case: use this tool when you want to replace an entire watchlist, as opposed to making incremental additions or removals. However, it does not explicitly name alternative tools or state when-not-to-use it, leaving some routing inference to the agent.

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