docmost-mcp-remote

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

Update Page

update_page

Destructive

Append, prepend, or replace a page body with Markdown; preview changes via dry-run diff and restore saved snapshots when needed.

Instructions

Change a page body with Markdown. Prefer operation 'append' or 'prepend', which keep the existing text, comments and formatting. 'replace' rewrites the whole body; read the page first and send the complete new body. It is refused on pages with formatting Markdown cannot hold (get_page lists it in markdown_loses); use replace_page_json there. 'replace' is also refused while someone else is editing the page. The previous body is saved as a snapshot that restore_snapshot can bring back. With dry_run=true nothing is written and the result shows the change as a diff. To change one part of a long page, prefer replace_section.

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`page`	Yes	Page id, slug id or Docmost page URL.
`content`	Yes	Markdown text.
`dry_run`	No	Only show the change as a diff; write nothing.
`operation`	No	append: add at the end; prepend: at the start; replace: all.	append
`drop_formatting`	No	Write even though the page has formatting Markdown cannot hold, which is then removed. Prefer replace_page_json for such pages.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.2.0Oct 27, 2026

TDQS

A4.8/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already flag destructiveHint=true, but the description goes well beyond them: it discloses the snapshot-and-restore safety net, the diff-only behavior of dry_run, the two refusal conditions, and the formatting-loss tradeoff of drop_formatting. That is exactly the behavioral context an agent needs to invoke a destructive mutation safely.

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?

Front-loaded with the core action and the recommended default, with each subsequent sentence carrying a distinct constraint or alternative. It is dense and runs long, but nearly every clause earns its place; the replace-refusal rules could be tightened slightly.

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?

With an output schema present the description need not explain return values, and it covers the mutation risks, refusal paths, alternatives, and defaults. Nothing an agent needs to call this correctly is missing.

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 coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3, but the description adds real meaning: operation semantics are explained in terms of what is preserved versus rewritten, dry_run is tied to diff output, and drop_formatting is connected to its consequence and to the preferred alternative. Minor room remains (e.g., content size/length guidance is only in the schema).

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Change a page body with Markdown') and immediately frames the operation modes, which clearly separates it from siblings like replace_page_json, replace_section, and rename_page. An agent can tell what this tool is and what it is not without opening the schema.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

Explicitly recommends 'append'/'prepend' over 'replace', tells the agent to read the page first before replacing, warns when 'replace' is refused (unrepresentable formatting, concurrent editing), and routes to replace_page_json and replace_section for those cases. This is a full when/when-not/alternatives map.

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

Deploy Server