Skip to main content
Glama
dnotitia

akb

by dnotitia
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Hybrid

akb_update

Update an existing document in the knowledge base by specifying only the fields to change; supply full body content as a replacement, and use targeted edits for inline changes.

Instructions

Update an existing document. Only provide fields you want to change. The content field replaces the complete Markdown body; never pass a partial fragment such as a newly uploaded image. Use a targeted akb_edit for inline insertion or replacement.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
uriYesDocument URI
fileNoLocal file path to read as document body (alternative to content). Provide either file or content, not both.
tagsNo
typeNoNew document type
titleNoNew title
domainNoNew document domain
statusNo
contentNoNew document body (replaces existing)
messageNoCommit message describing the change
summaryNo
depends_onNoUpdate the same-vault dependency list (akb:// URIs). Use an ordinary Markdown link in content for a cross-vault reference.
related_toNoUpdate the same-vault related list (akb:// URIs). Use an ordinary Markdown link in content for a cross-vault reference.
expected_commitNoOptional OCC pin — reject if the document current_commit moved.
_vault_skill_ackNoOpaque acknowledgement returned as vault_skill.ack_token. After applying that guide, retry the unchanged operation with this value. The bundled proxy supplies it automatically.
expected_content_hashNoOptional body hash pin — reject if the current document body hash moved.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed5 schema fields changedv2.0.14
    • addedInput schema / properties / _vault_skill_ack
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Opaque acknowledgement returned as vault_skill.ack_token. After applying that guide, retry the unchanged operation with this value. The bundled proxy supplies it automatically.",
+  "maxLength": 128,
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • changedInput schema / properties / depends_on / description
      Previous value: -"Update dependency list (akb:// URIs)"New value: +"Update the same-vault dependency list (akb:// URIs). Use an ordinary Markdown link in content for a cross-vault reference."
    • addedInput schema / properties / domain
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "New document domain",
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • changedInput schema / properties / related_to / description
      Previous value: -"Update related list (akb:// URIs)"New value: +"Update the same-vault related list (akb:// URIs). Use an ordinary Markdown link in content for a cross-vault reference."
    • addedInput schema / properties / type
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "New document type",
+  "type": "string"
+}
  2. Changed3 schema fields changedv2.0.7
    • addedInput schema / properties / expected_commit
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Optional OCC pin — reject if the document current_commit moved.",
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / expected_content_hash
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Optional body hash pin — reject if the current document body hash moved.",
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • changedInput schema / properties / status / enum
      Previous value: -[
-  "draft",
-  "active",
-  "archived",
-  "superseded"
-]New value: +[
+  "draft",
+  "active",
+  "archived"
+]
  3. Addedv2.0.4
  4. Removedv2.0.1
  5. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full disclosure burden. It clearly warns that `content` replaces the entire Markdown body and should never receive a partial fragment, which is the most important behavioral trap. It does not disclose commit/versioning behavior or failure modes, so it is strong but not exhaustive.

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?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with the purpose, and every sentence carries operational weight. There is no filler or repetition of schema details.

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 mutation tool with 15 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description covers the core usage pitfalls and sibling routing well. It does not explain what the operation returns or the optimistic-concurrency pins, but those are partially described in the schema, so the definition is strong but not fully comprehensive.

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

Parameters4/5

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

Schema description coverage is 80%, so most parameter semantics already exist in the schema. The description adds real value by explaining the partial-update model ('Only provide fields you want to change') and by clarifying that `content` is a complete replacement, not an incremental edit.

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 states a clear verb and resource: 'Update an existing document'. It also distinguishes itself from the sibling akb_edit by noting that akb_edit is for targeted inline insertion or replacement, which helps an agent pick the right tool.

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?

It gives concrete usage guidance: only provide fields to change, and use akb_edit for targeted inline edits instead. This explicitly routes the agent to the correct alternative, which is exactly what this dimension asks for.

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