Skip to main content
Glama
chrischall

zola-mcp

by chrischall
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

update_wedding_settings

DestructiveIdempotent

Update top-level wedding settings by sending only the fields you want changed; all other details stay the same, with a confirmation step before changes apply.

Instructions

Update top-level wedding settings. Provide only the fields you want to change; the rest are preserved. Asks the user to confirm first: a confirmation prompt where the client supports one; otherwise the first call returns a preview and a confirmToken, and only a repeat call with that token proceeds (see MCP_CONFIRM_MODE).

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
cityNo
slugNoURL slug — appears in the public website URL. Changing it breaks every link and QR code already shared or printed with the old URL
titleNoWedding title (e.g., "Alex & Jordan")
hashtagNoe.g. #alexjordan2026 — empty string clears it
guest_countNo
confirmTokenNoONLY for the two-step confirmation fallback (a client without MCP elicitation). The confirmToken from this same tool's phase-1 "confirmation-required" response, passed back ONLY after the user has seen that preview and explicitly approved it in chat — never on the first call, never invented, never reused. Call again with the same arguments. Ignored when the client supports elicitation.
wedding_dateNoYYYY-MM-DD
state_provinceNo
owner_last_nameNo
owner_first_nameNo
partner_last_nameNo
enable_search_zolaNoAllow Zola search to find the site
partner_first_nameNo
enable_search_engineNoAllow search engines (Google, etc.) to index the site

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv2.1.4
    • addedInput schema / properties / confirmToken
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "ONLY for the two-step confirmation fallback (a client without MCP elicitation). The confirmToken from this same tool's phase-1 \"confirmation-required\" response, passed back ONLY after the user has seen that preview and explicitly approved it in chat — never on the first call, never invented, never reused. Call again with the same arguments. Ignored when the client supports elicitation.",
+  "type": "string"
+}
  2. Changed2 schema fields changedv2.1.2
    • changedInput schema / properties / hashtag / description
      Previous value: -"e.g. #merchris2026 — empty string clears it"New value: +"e.g. #alexjordan2026 — empty string clears it"
    • changedInput schema / properties / slug / description
      Previous value: -"URL slug — appears in the public website URL"New value: +"URL slug — appears in the public website URL. Changing it breaks every link and QR code already shared or printed with the old URL"
  3. Changed1 schema field changedv2.0.0
    • changedInput schema / $schema
      Previous value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"New value: +"https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema"
  4. First observedv1.4.2

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Adds substantial behavior beyond the annotations: a mandatory user-confirmation flow, the two-phase preview/confirmToken fallback, and an explicit constraint that the token must never be invented, reused, or sent on the first call. This is rich context that annotations (destructive/idempotent/openWorld) do not convey. It stops short of explaining what specifically is destructive beyond the confirmation gate.

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 action, then the partial-update rule, then the confirmation mechanics. Three sentences with little waste, though the confirmation clause is dense and would benefit from clearer separation.

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

Completeness4/5

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

For a 14-param, no-required-fields mutation with no output schema, the description covers the critical missing piece: the confirmation protocol and its fallback return shape (preview + confirmToken). Nothing essential to correct invocation is absent.

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 50%, and the description adds no parameter meaning of its own beyond pointing at confirmToken and MCP_CONFIRM_MODE. The documented params (slug, hashtag, confirmToken, booleans) are well covered in the schema, and the undocumented ones are self-explanatory (city, names, date), so the gap is not severe, but the description does not compensate.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Update top-level wedding settings'), which is clearly scoped and distinguishable from update_page, update_event, or update_vendor. It does not explicitly name its read counterpart get_wedding_settings, so sibling differentiation is implicit rather than stated.

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 'provide only the fields you want to change; the rest are preserved' line is useful invocation guidance for a partial-update tool, but the description never says when to reach for this versus the many other update_* siblings. Usage is implied by the resource name rather than explained.

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