Skip to main content
Glama
cmendezs

mcp-facture-electronique-fr

update_routing_code

Partially update a routing code's value or label in the PPF directory. Only explicit fields change; omit fields to keep current values. Use to rename or relabel without recreation.

Instructions

Partially update an existing routing code in the PPF directory (PATCH semantics).

Only the fields explicitly provided are modified; omitted fields keep their current values. Use to rename a routing code value or update its label without recreating it.

BEHAVIOR:

  • Returns the updated routing code object on success.

  • Fails with 404 if the instanceId does not exist.

  • Fails if the new routing_code value is already used by another routing code on the same SIRET (duplicate).

  • Updating routing_code renames it in-place; existing directory lines referencing it are updated automatically.

  • Providing neither routing_code nor label is a no-op (returns the unchanged object).

RESPONSE: the full updated routing code object — instanceId, siret, siren, routingCode, label, updatedAt.

USAGE GUIDELINES:

  • Retrieve the instanceId first via search_routing_code if you only know the routing code value.

  • Prefer updating the label for cosmetic changes; only change routing_code if the identifier itself must change (e.g. department renamed), since senders may have cached the old value.

  • To delete and replace a routing code entirely, use delete on the old instanceId and create_routing_code for the new one.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
instance_idYesInstance identifier of the routing code to update. Obtained from create_routing_code or search_routing_code response. Required — there is no lookup by routing_code value directly.
routing_codeNoNew routing code value (replaces the existing one). Must be unique for the associated SIRET. Omit to leave the current value unchanged.
labelNoNew descriptive label for the routing code. Omit to leave the current label unchanged.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Behavior5/5

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

Without annotations, the description fully covers behavioral traits: return type, 404 on missing instanceId, duplicate check, in-place rename with automatic reference update, and no-op if no fields provided. No contradictions.

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 well-structured with sections, front-loaded with purpose, and every sentence adds value. It is concise for the amount of information conveyed.

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 implied, the description still covers return values. It addresses all relevant aspects: inputs, behavior, edge cases, and usage context. Highly complete for a 3-parameter PATCH tool.

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?

Input schema has 100% description coverage, so baseline is 3. The description adds extra context like duplicate uniqueness for routing_code and no-op behavior, which provides meaning beyond the schema, but not extensively.

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 tool performs a partial update (PATCH) on a routing code, specifying it can rename or update the label. This distinguishes it from siblings like create_routing_code or delete_routing_code.

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?

Explicit usage guidelines are provided: retrieve instanceId first, prefer label updates for cosmetics, and delete+create for complete replacement. This clearly indicates when to use this tool vs alternatives.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/cmendezs/mcp-facture-electronique-fr'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server