Purelymail MCP

Modify user

modify_user

Destructive

Change a mail user's address, password, or settings, updating only the fields you provide and leaving other account details unchanged.

Instructions

Changes a user's address, password or settings. Only the fields provided are changed.

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": {
      "userName": "<userName>"
    },
    "name": "modify_user"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`userName`	Yes	Full username, e.g. "user@domain.com"
`newPassword`	No
`newUserName`	No	Full new username, e.g. "user@domain.com"
`enablePasswordReset`	No	Whether this user can have their password reset.
`enableSearchIndexing`	No	Indexes may take some time to be created after enabling.
`requireTwoFactorAuthentication`	No	Whether this user requires 2FA for login.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.1Nov 13, 2026

TDQS

B3.4/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, readOnlyHint=false and openWorldHint=true, so the mutation risk profile is known. The description adds genuinely useful partial-update semantics ("Only the fields provided are changed"), but says nothing about password-change side effects, whether renaming alters login identity, or irreversibility.

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?

Two short sentences, front-loaded with purpose followed by the key semantic constraint. Minimal waste, though the loosely used "address" wording costs a little precision.

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 six-parameter destructive mutation with annotations covering the safety profile, the description plus annotations plus a well-documented schema cover what an agent needs to select and invoke it. No output schema exists, so return-value explanation is not required.

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 description coverage is 83%, so the schema already documents userName, newUserName, enablePasswordReset, enableSearchIndexing and requireTwoFactorAuthentication. The description adds only the partial-update rule and no format or interaction details, so baseline 3 applies.

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?

"Changes a user's address, password or settings" gives a specific verb and resource, and it is clearly distinguishable from create_user/delete_user/list_users. The listed field groups roughly map to the schema, though "address" is an imprecise label for the userName/newUserName identifiers.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance: nothing about prerequisites (must the user already exist?), when to prefer create_user versus this tool, or whether renaming via newUserName has side effects. Usage is only implied by the verb "Changes".

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