Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
APISIX-MCP

APISIX-MCP

by api7
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Hybrid

update_route

Modifies attributes of an existing route in APISIX-MCP, including paths, methods, hosts, upstreams, and plugins, to optimize API gateway configurations.

Instructions

Update specific attributes of an existing route

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "update_route"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idNoroute id
routeNoroute configuration

Implementation Reference

  • src/tools/route.ts:16-18 (handler)
    The inline handler function for the 'update_route' tool, which makes a PATCH request to the Admin API endpoint `/routes/${args.id}` with the provided route updates. Note that this is embedded within the tool registration.
    server.tool("update_route", "Update specific attributes of an existing route", UpdateRouteSchema.shape, async (args) => {
  return await makeAdminAPIRequest(`/routes/${args.id}`, "PATCH", args.route);
});
  • src/schemas/route.ts:64-67 (schema)
    Zod schema defining the input for the 'update_route' tool: requires route ID and optional partial route configuration for patching.
    export const UpdateRouteSchema = createNullablePatchSchema(z.object({
  id: z.string().describe("route id"),
  route: RouteSchema.partial(),
}));
  • src/tools/route.ts:16-18 (registration)
    Registers the 'update_route' MCP tool with the server, including description, input schema, and handler.
    server.tool("update_route", "Update specific attributes of an existing route", UpdateRouteSchema.shape, async (args) => {
  return await makeAdminAPIRequest(`/routes/${args.id}`, "PATCH", args.route);
});
  • src/index.ts:23-23 (registration)
    Top-level call to setupRouteTools, which registers the update_route tool among others.
    setupRouteTools(server);

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

C2.9/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden but offers minimal behavioral insight. It states it's an update operation (implying mutation) but doesn't disclose required permissions, whether changes are reversible, error handling, rate limits, or what the response contains. For a complex mutation tool, this is inadequate.

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 a single, efficient sentence with zero waste. It's front-loaded with the core action ('Update specific attributes') and resource ('existing route'), making it immediately understandable.

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?

For a mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is insufficient. It doesn't explain what 'update' entails behaviorally (e.g., partial vs. full updates, idempotency), return values, or error conditions. Given the complexity implied by the schema, more context is needed.

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 100%, so parameters are well-documented in the schema itself. The description adds no additional parameter context beyond implying 'id' and 'route' are involved, matching the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate as the schema does the heavy lifting.

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?

The description clearly states the verb ('Update') and resource ('existing route'), specifying it modifies 'specific attributes' rather than creating or replacing entirely. It distinguishes from sibling 'create_route' by focusing on updates, though doesn't explicitly contrast with other update tools like 'update_service' or 'update_upstream'.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description doesn't mention prerequisites (e.g., needing a route ID), compare with sibling tools like 'create_route' or other update tools, or indicate scenarios where this is appropriate versus not.

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

Related Tools