Transistor-MCP

update_subscriber

Update a subscriber's email address by providing their subscriber ID and new email.

Instructions

Update a subscriber's email address

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": {
      "subscriber_id": "<subscriber_id>",
      "email": "<email>"
    },
    "name": "update_subscriber"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`email`	Yes	New email address
`subscriber_id`	Yes	ID of the subscriber to update

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.2.0Jun 25, 2026

TDQS

B3.1/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations, the description should disclose side effects or requirements. It only states 'update email', omitting whether the subscriber must exist, if emails are validated for uniqueness, or error behavior.

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 efficient sentence with no unnecessary words, perfectly sized for this simple operation.

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

Completeness3/5

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

For a tool with only two required parameters and no output schema, the description is functionally adequate but lacks behavioral context like error states or constraints (e.g., email format, uniqueness).

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 coverage is 100%, so parameters are already documented. The description adds minimal value by clarifying 'New email address' for the email parameter, but this repeats schema intent.

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?

The description clearly states the verb 'Update' and the resource 'a subscriber's email address', distinguishing it from sibling tools like create_subscriber, delete_subscriber, or list_subscribers.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as when to update other subscriber fields or prerequisites like subscriber existence.

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