Skip to main content
Glama
deyikong

SendGrid MCP Server

by deyikong
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

Update Automation Settings

update_automation_settings
Idempotent

Rename an automation or switch its status to active or paused by updating settings with the automation ID.

Instructions

Update automation-level settings such as name, status, and title. Use this to activate/pause entire automations or rename them.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
titleNoNew title/name for the automation
statusNoSet the automation status to 'active' or 'paused'
automation_idYesThe automation ID to update

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv1.1.1
    • removedInput schema / additionalProperties
      Removed value: -false
  2. Addedv1.0.4

TDQS

A4.1/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already indicate the operation is a non-read-only, idempotent, non-destructive write. The description adds that status changes activate/pause the entire automation, a meaningful behavioral consequence beyond what the schema enum alone conveys. No contradiction with annotations is present.

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

Conciseness4/5

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

Two short sentences that front-load the action and fields. Some redundancy exists between the first and second sentence, but no extraneous detail is present.

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

Completeness4/5

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

For a three-parameter update tool with no output schema, the description covers the main usage intent and state-change semantics. It omits return-value or prerequisite details, but the tool's simplicity and full schema coverage keep this gap minor.

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 the schema already documents all parameters, making the baseline a 3. The description adds modest semantic context by equating 'status' with activating/pausing, but it does not clarify parameter formats or the relationship between 'name' and 'title'.

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 specifies a clear action ('update') and resource ('automation-level settings'), and enumerates the exact fields (name, status, title). It distinguishes itself from the sibling update_automation_step by targeting the entire automation rather than an individual step.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The line 'Use this to activate/pause entire automations or rename them' gives concrete scenarios for when to call this tool. It does not explicitly list alternatives or exclusion conditions, but the automation-level framing makes the intended context clear enough for an agent.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools