Skip to main content
Glama

update_record

Modify existing Salesforce records by providing object name, record ID, and updated data fields to maintain accurate information.

Instructions

Updates an existing record

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
object_nameYesThe name of the Salesforce object (e.g., 'Account', 'Contact')
record_idYesThe ID of the record to update
dataYesThe updated data for the record

Implementation Reference

  • Handler implementation for the 'update_record' tool. Extracts object_name, record_id, and data from arguments, validates them, retrieves the Salesforce object dynamically, calls the update method on the record, and returns a TextContent with the result.
    elif name == "update_record":
        object_name = arguments.get("object_name")
        record_id = arguments.get("record_id")
        data = arguments.get("data")
        if not object_name or not record_id or not data:
            raise ValueError("Missing 'object_name', 'record_id', or 'data' argument")
        if not sf_client.sf:
            raise ValueError("Salesforce connection not established.")
        sf_object = getattr(sf_client.sf, object_name)
        results = sf_object.update(record_id, data)
        return [
            types.TextContent(
                type="text",
                text=f"Update {object_name} Record Result: {results}",
            )
        ]
  • JSON Schema definition for the 'update_record' tool inputs, specifying required parameters: object_name, record_id, and data (object). Part of the tool registration in list_tools().
    types.Tool(
        name="update_record",
        description="Updates an existing record",
        inputSchema={
            "type": "object",
            "properties": {
                "object_name": {
                    "type": "string",
                    "description": "The name of the Salesforce object (e.g., 'Account', 'Contact')",
                },
                "record_id": {
                    "type": "string",
                    "description": "The ID of the record to update",
                },
                "data": {
                    "type": "object",
                    "description": "The updated data for the record",
                    "properties": {},
                    "additionalProperties": True,
                },
            },
            "required": ["object_name", "record_id", "data"],
        },
    ),
  • Registration of the 'update_record' tool within the @server.list_tools() decorator, including name, description, and input schema.
    types.Tool(
        name="update_record",
        description="Updates an existing record",
        inputSchema={
            "type": "object",
            "properties": {
                "object_name": {
                    "type": "string",
                    "description": "The name of the Salesforce object (e.g., 'Account', 'Contact')",
                },
                "record_id": {
                    "type": "string",
                    "description": "The ID of the record to update",
                },
                "data": {
                    "type": "object",
                    "description": "The updated data for the record",
                    "properties": {},
                    "additionalProperties": True,
                },
            },
            "required": ["object_name", "record_id", "data"],
        },
    ),
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states this is an update operation (implying mutation), but doesn't address permissions required, whether changes are reversible, error conditions, or side effects. For a mutation tool with zero annotation coverage, this leaves significant gaps in understanding its behavior.

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 extremely concise at just three words, with zero wasted language. It's front-loaded with the core action, though this brevity comes at the cost of completeness.

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 3 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is inadequate. It doesn't explain what constitutes a 'record', what system it operates on, what happens on success/failure, or how it differs from sibling tools. The context signals indicate complexity that isn't addressed.

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 all parameters are documented in the schema itself. The description adds no additional meaning about parameters beyond what's already in the schema (e.g., it doesn't clarify the structure of 'data' or provide examples). Baseline 3 is appropriate when the schema does the heavy lifting.

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

Purpose3/5

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

The description 'Updates an existing record' clearly states the verb (update) and resource (record), but it's generic and doesn't distinguish this tool from similar operations like 'create_record' or 'delete_record'. It lacks specificity about what kind of record or system is involved.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'create_record' or 'delete_record'. The description doesn't mention prerequisites (e.g., needing an existing record ID) or contextual factors that would help an agent choose appropriately among sibling tools.

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/leilaabdel/MCP-Salesforce'

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