Skip to main content
Glama
esignaturescom

MCP Server for eSignatures

update_template

Modify contract template titles, labels, or content including headers, text, images, tables, and signer fields for eSignature workflows.

Instructions

Updates the title, labels or the content of a contract template.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
titleNoThe new title of the template.
labelsNoList of labels to be assigned to the template.
document_elementsNoThe content of the template like headers, text, and images for the document.

Implementation Reference

  • Handler logic for the 'update_template' tool: sends a POST request to the eSignatures API endpoint /api/templates/{template_id} with the provided arguments as JSON body.
    if name == "update_template":
        response = await httpxClient.post(f"/api/templates/{arguments.get('template_id')}?token={secret_token}", json=arguments)
        return [types.TextContent(type="text", text=f"Response code: {response.status_code}, response: {response.json()}")]
  • Pydantic/JSON schema defining the input parameters for the 'update_template' tool: title, labels, and document_elements.
    INPUT_SCHEMA_UPDATE_TEMPLATE = {
        "type": "object",
        "properties": {
            "title": {"type": "string", "description": "The new title of the template."},
            "labels": {"type": "array", "description": "List of labels to be assigned to the template.", "items": {"type": "string"}},
            "document_elements": {
                "type": "array",
                "description": "The content of the template like headers, text, and images for the document.",
                "items": INPUT_SCHEMA_DOCUMENT_ELEMENTS_ITEMS
            }
        }
    }
  • Registration of the 'update_template' tool in the MCP server's list_tools() method, including name, description, and input schema reference.
    name="update_template",
    description="Updates the title, labels or the content of a contract template.",
    inputSchema=INPUT_SCHEMA_UPDATE_TEMPLATE
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It states this is an update operation, implying mutation, but doesn't describe permissions required, whether changes are reversible, how partial updates are handled, or what the response looks like. For a mutation tool with zero annotation coverage, this leaves significant behavioral gaps.

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 a single, efficient sentence that front-loads the core purpose with zero wasted words. It directly communicates what the tool does without unnecessary elaboration or repetition.

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

Completeness2/5

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

For a mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is insufficiently complete. It doesn't address behavioral aspects like error conditions, response format, or side effects. The complexity of the document_elements parameter (with multiple nested object types) suggests the tool has significant behavioral nuance that isn't captured in the minimal description.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents all three parameters thoroughly. The description mentions the same three parameters (title, labels, content) but adds no additional semantic context beyond what's in the schema. This meets the baseline for high schema coverage.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the verb ('Updates') and the resource ('contract template'), specifying what can be updated ('title, labels or the content'). It distinguishes from siblings like create_template (creation) and delete_template (deletion), but doesn't explicitly differentiate from other update operations that might exist.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention prerequisites (e.g., needing an existing template ID), constraints (e.g., what happens if only partial fields are provided), or relationships with sibling tools like query_template (to check current state) or create_template (for initial creation).

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/esignaturescom/mcp-server-esignatures'

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