cucm-emulator-mcp

emu_update_cdr_publisher

Update CUCM emulator CDR publisher settings to configure where and how call detail records are sent. Set transport, SFTP, HTTP, local paths, intervals, and file prefixes.

Instructions

Update canonical CDR publisher configuration

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": "emu_update_cdr_publisher"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`enabled`	No
`sftpHost`	No
`sftpPort`	No
`transport`	No
`uploadUrl`	No
`filePrefix`	No
`intervalMs`	No
`sftpPassword`	No
`sftpUsername`	No
`localDirectory`	No
`sftpRemotePath`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.1Aug 23, 2026

TDQS

B3/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, and the description only mentions 'update' without disclosing side effects, idempotency, or potential destructive behavior. It does not indicate whether changes are reversible or what happens to existing settings.

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, concise sentence that front-loads the verb and resource, containing no unnecessary words.

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

Completeness1/5

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

With no output schema and no mention of return values, side effects, or prerequisites, the description is highly incomplete for a tool with 11 parameters that performs a mutation.

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

Parameters1/5

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

The schema lists 11 parameters with no descriptions, and the tool description provides no explanations for any of them. The enum for 'transport' is present but unexplained, leaving the agent without any semantic guidance.

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 action (update) and the resource (canonical CDR publisher configuration), distinguishing it from sibling tools like emu_get_cdr_publisher and emu_update_cmr_publisher.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

The purpose implies it is used for modifying the CDR publisher configuration, but the description does not explicitly state when to use it versus alternatives such as the get tool, nor does it mention any prerequisites or sequencing.

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

Deploy Server