Skip to main content
Glama
darthzen

fossa-mcp

by darthzen

fossa_update_org_settings

DestructiveIdempotent

Update a FOSSA organization's settings by replacing a section or propagating its defaults to every project.

Instructions

Write one section of a FOSSA organization's settings, or push a section's organization defaults down onto every existing project.

WRITES TO FOSSA. Requires FOSSA_ORG_ID, FOSSA_ALLOW_WRITES=true and FOSSA_ALLOW_DESTRUCTIVE=true. Both actions destroy state, for different reasons, and some sections require more still; the tier is decided per call:

  • action="replace" requires FOSSA_ALLOW_DESTRUCTIVE=true. The PUT replaces the whole section rather than merging into it, so a body that omits a key erases it, and FOSSA offers no undo.

  • action="propagate" requires FOSSA_ALLOW_DESTRUCTIVE=true. It overwrites the named setting on every project in the organization, so its target set is unbounded regardless of the HTTP verb.

  • section="authentication" also requires FOSSA_ALLOW_ADMIN=true, as does section="general" when values carries defaultRoleId or disableNonCustomTeamUserRoles.

action="replace" (the default) sends the section's PUT. It REPLACES the section rather than merging, so pass the whole section, not just the key being changed; re-read it with fossa_org_settings first. values is the body, keyed by FOSSA's own field names, and unknown keys are rejected before any request is made. Two sections take a bare JSON array instead and use items: "languages-pod" (a list of source URLs) and "integrations-custom-license-scans" (objects with name, matchCriteria, and optionally id).

action="propagate" sends the section's PATCH and takes fields, the organization defaults to push out. Only the ten "projects-*" sections support it, and each accepts its own field list.

One writable section is not readable: "sbom-report-defaults" sets the author and supplier stamped into generated SBOMs. To replace the organization's SAML single sign-on configuration, use fossa_update_saml_settings — it is not a section here.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
itemsNo
actionNoreplace
fieldsNo
valuesNo
sectionYes

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Behavior5/5

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

Description discloses that both actions destroy state, replace is a full-section replacement with no undo, propagate overwrites on every project, unknown keys are rejected, and sbom-report-defaults is not readable. This goes well beyond the annotations (destructiveHint=true, readOnlyHint=false) and provides essential behavioral context.

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?

Despite being long, the description is exceptionally well-structured with bullets and bolded action names. Every sentence adds critical information about auth, behavior, or parameter usage. No fluff or redundancy; the length is justified by the tool's complexity.

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?

The description covers all major edge cases: section-specific auth requirements, non-readable section, unsupported sections for propagate, array-based sections, and an explicit pointer to the SAML alternative. With an output schema present, the lack of return-value discussion is fine. This is complete for a complex write tool.

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

Parameters5/5

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

Even though schema description coverage is 0%, the description thoroughly explains `action`, `values`, `items`, `fields`, and `section` semantics. It clarifies which sections use items vs values, what fields does in propagate, and how action changes the HTTP verb. This fully compensates for the lack of schema descriptions.

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 writes one section of FOSSA organization settings or propagates defaults to all projects. It distinguishes from related tools by name (e.g., fossa_org_settings for reading, fossa_update_saml_settings for SAML). This is a specific verb+resource with scope.

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?

The description explicitly explains when to use replace vs propagate, specifies prerequisites (FOSSA_ALLOW_DESTRUCTIVE, FOSSA_ALLOW_ADMIN for certain sections), and names an alternative tool for SAML. It also advises re-reading with fossa_org_settings before replace to avoid clobbering. This is comprehensive guidance.

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/darthzen/fossa-mcp'

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