Skip to main content
Glama
hybriden

Paperboy CMS

Official
by hybriden
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Hybrid

update_user

Idempotent

Change a Paperboy CMS user's name, roles, or section scopes (Admin only). Omitted fields stay as-is; roles and sections replace the existing lists.

Instructions

Change a user's name, roles and/or section scopes (Admin only). Omitted fields are kept; roles and sections REPLACE the current lists. Changes apply from the user's next request. Returns {ok:true}.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYesThe user's id from list_users.
nameNoNew display name.
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.
rolesNoAdmin = everything; Editor = all content + publish + form submissions; Author = write content within its sections; Viewer = read-only.
sectionsNodocumentIds of top-level pages this user is limited to (its subtree). Omit or [] for the whole site.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed4 schema fields changedv0.1.3
    • addedInput schema / properties / id / description
      Added value: +"The user's id from list_users."
    • addedInput schema / properties / name / description
      Added value: +"New display name."
    • addedInput schema / properties / roles / description
      Added value: +"Admin = everything; Editor = all content + publish + form submissions; Author = write content within its sections; Viewer = read-only."
    • addedInput schema / properties / sections / description
      Added value: +"documentIds of top-level pages this user is limited to (its subtree). Omit or [] for the whole site."
  2. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4.7/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Goes well beyond the annotations (readOnly=false, idempotent=true) by disclosing partial-update semantics ('omitted fields are kept'), the critical REPLACE behavior for roles/sections, propagation timing, and the return shape {ok:true}. These are exactly the traits an agent needs and cannot infer from the structured fields alone.

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, each load-bearing, with the Admin restriction and mutation semantics front-loaded. No filler or redundancy.

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 mutation tool with no output schema, it covers the restriction (Admin), replace-vs-keep semantics, timing, and return value. Nothing an agent needs to call it correctly is missing.

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 coverage is 100% so the baseline is 3, but the description adds genuinely new meaning: which parameters are optional/preserved versus which are destructive-replacing lists. This clarifies the roles and sections arrays beyond their per-field schema text.

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?

Specific verb 'Change' plus resource 'user' and the exact mutable fields (name, roles, section scopes). It is trivially distinguishable from sibling write operations like create_user, delete_user, and list_users without opening any schema.

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?

States the '(Admin only)' precondition and the deployment timing ('apply from the user's next request'), giving clear context for safe use. It does not, however, explicitly route the agent to or away from the sibling user-management tools, so it stops short of full when/when-not guidance.

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