Update multiple items in a Braze catalog with partial edits, up to 50 items per call. Use catalog name and item IDs to modify existing entries.
Edit multiple items in a catalog (partial update).
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| items | Yes | Items to edit (max 50) | |
| apiKey | No | Braze REST API key | |
| catalog_name | Yes | Catalog name | |
| restEndpoint | No | Braze REST endpoint URL |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It does disclose that updates are partial, but omits permission/auth requirements, batching failure behavior, rate limits, and whether unspecified fields are preserved or cleared.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
A single front-loaded sentence with no filler. It is efficient, though its brevity borders on under-specification rather than true conciseness.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
For a batch mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the one-line description is too thin: it doesn't clarify merge-vs-replace semantics for partial updates, per-item error behavior, or how it relates to sibling edit/update tools.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents catalog_name, items, apiKey, and restEndpoint. The description adds only the notion of multiple items and partial updates, which aligns with but does not extend the schema.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
States a specific verb+resource ('Edit ... items in a catalog') and signals batch scope with 'multiple items', which distinguishes it from the singular catalog_item_edit sibling. However, it does not explain how it differs from the near-identical catalog_items_update sibling.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
No when-to-use guidance is given. With siblings like catalog_item_edit and catalog_items_update that overlap heavily, the agent gets no criterion for choosing this tool over them, and no prerequisites or preconditions are stated.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.