Concrete CMS MCP Server

update-page-version-by-page-id-and-version-id

Destructive

Update a specific page version by page ID and version ID, and set approval status or publish end date to control content availability.

Instructions

Update a page version

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "pageID": "<pageID>",
      "versionID": "<versionID>"
    },
    "name": "update-page-version-by-page-id-and-version-id"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`pageID`	Yes	ID of page to update
`versionID`	Yes	versionID parameter
`is_approved`	No
`publish_end_date`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.0-alpha.1Aug 11, 2026

TDQS

D1.9/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=true, so the safety profile is covered, but the description adds nothing beyond that: it does not say whether the update is partial or full-replacement, what a destructive outcome means here, or whether the page itself is affected. For a destructive mutation, that is a notable gap.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness2/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The single sentence contains no waste but is under-specified rather than concise; it is shorter than the minimum needed to describe a four-parameter destructive mutation. Front-loading is irrelevant when there is only one generic clause.

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?

Given a destructive write operation, four parameters with only half described, and no output schema, the description should carry substantial weight but carries none. An agent cannot determine what the tool changes or what a successful call implies.

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

Parameters2/5

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

Schema description coverage is only 50%, and the description adds no parameter meaning at all. The two optional fields is_approved and publish_end_date are undocumented in the description, and the schema's own versionID description ('versionID parameter') is tautological, so nothing compensates for the coverage gap.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose2/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description 'Update a page version' merely restates the tool title and name with no additional specificity. It does not say which aspects of the version can be changed (approval status, publish window) nor how it differs from siblings like update-page-by-id or get-page-version-by-page-id-and-version-id.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance, no mention of prerequisites (e.g., required permissions or version state), and no pointer to alternatives such as update_page_content or get-page-versions-by-page-id. The agent must infer everything from the tool name.

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