Skip to main content
Glama

update_assets_metadata

Batch-update metadata for multiple photos at once: set date, GPS location, description, favorite status, or rating across selected assets in a single call.

Instructions

Update the same metadata fields on many assets in ONE call — the whole roll of a scanned album gets its real date, a trip's photos get their GPS, a selection becomes favorites. Same fields as update_asset_metadata; only the provided ones change. Side effect: permanently changes the metadata of every listed asset.

Args:
    asset_ids: The assets to update.
    date_time_original: ISO 8601 datetime applied to all of them.
    latitude: GPS latitude, decimal degrees.
    longitude: GPS longitude, decimal degrees.
    description: Description/caption applied to all of them.
    is_favorite: Set favorite status on all of them.
    rating: -1 to reject them, or 1 to 5 stars. A rating cannot be cleared
        from here, and 0 is not a rating Immich 3.x accepts.

Returns: JSON with success and the number of assets updated.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
ratingNo
latitudeNo
asset_idsYes
longitudeNo
descriptionNo
is_favoriteNo
date_time_originalNo

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes
Install Server

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 burden of disclosing side effects, and it does: it states the change 'permanently changes the metadata of every listed asset' and notes that only provided fields change. It also flags rating limitations (cannot be cleared, 0 rejected). This is strong behavioral disclosure for a mutating tool.

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 well-structured and efficiently front-loaded: it opens with the core batch purpose, gives relatable examples, then lists parameters in a scannable Args block. Every sentence adds value, including the side-effect warning and return type.

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?

For a tool with 7 parameters, no annotations, and a meaningful sibling distinction, the description covers purpose, usage, parameter semantics, side effects, and return value. Nothing critical is missing for an agent to select and invoke it correctly.

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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description fully compensates by explaining each parameter's meaning: ISO 8601 for date_time_original, decimal degrees for GPS, favorite status semantics, and the special -1/0/1-5 rating rules. This adds meaning well beyond the raw schema field names.

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 names a specific verb ('Update'), a clear resource ('metadata fields on many assets'), and the batch nature in 'ONE call'. It explicitly differentiates itself from the singular sibling update_asset_metadata by emphasizing multi-asset operation, so an agent can distinguish the tools.

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 description gives concrete usage scenarios (scanned album roll, trip photos, selection favorites) and references update_asset_metadata as the same-fields counterpart. It implies the singular tool is for single assets, though it does not explicitly state 'use update_asset_metadata for one asset', so some inference remains.

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

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/drolosoft/immich-photo-manager'

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