Skip to main content
Glama
hybriden

Paperboy CMS

Official
by hybriden
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Hybrid

set_field

Idempotent

Update a single draft field with a plain string while preserving all other fields. Use it to safely write long text or Markdown without serialization issues.

Instructions

Set ONE field of a content item's draft to a plain string value (merged — other fields are kept). THE MOST ROBUST WAY TO WRITE LONG TEXT/MARKDOWN CONTENT: a flat string parameter survives tool-call serialization that can mangle long strings nested inside data records. For text/markdown/select/datetime/image fields, and the special field name name (the item's display name).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
siteNoSite slug or id to act in (multisite). Omit to use this server's default site. Call list_sites to see what exists — an empty tree or search usually means the wrong site, not missing content.
fieldYesField name from the content type (or 'name')
valueYesThe plain string value
localeNoLocale code. Omit for the document's own locale (its site-default variant, else its only variant).
documentIdYesThe item's documentId (stable across locales and versions), e.g. from tree, list_pages or get_content.
allowLanguageMismatchNoSet true ONLY to deliberately write text whose language differs from the locale branch (the guard otherwise refuses, so e.g. Norwegian text can't silently land on the 'en' branch)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv0.1.3
    • changedInput schema / properties / documentId / description
      Previous value: -"Content documentId"New value: +"The item's documentId (stable across locales and versions), e.g. from tree, list_pages or get_content."
  2. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Adds real behavioral context beyond annotations: merge semantics (other fields preserved), the serialization-robustness rationale, and the set of supported field types. Annotations already cover the safety profile (idempotent, non-destructive, not read-only), and the language-mismatch guard is documented in the schema.

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?

Three sentences, front-loaded with the core action and followed by the differentiating rationale. The all-caps emphasis is slightly loud but the information is dense and non-redundant.

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 full annotation coverage, a 100%-documented schema, and no output schema, the description supplies merge behavior, the key serialization caveat, and supported types — enough for an agent to call it correctly. Auth/versioning prerequisites are the only notable omission.

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 100%, so the schema already carries the parameter burden (baseline 3). The description still adds value by identifying which field types are settable and clarifying that `field` accepts the special value `name` for the display name.

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?

States a precise verb+resource+scope: 'Set ONE field of a content item's draft to a plain string value (merged — other fields are kept).' The 'ONE field' and merge framing distinguishes it implicitly from whole-record siblings like update_content, but no sibling is named explicitly.

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?

Gives a clear use case (writing long text/markdown where nested `data` records risk serialization mangling) and lists supported field types plus the special `name` target. It stops short of explicitly naming update_content or stating when NOT to use this tool.

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