MCP VTEX Server

vtex_update_inventory

Update inventory quantity for a SKU in a VTEX warehouse to manage stock levels and prevent overselling.

Instructions

Update inventory quantity for a SKU in a warehouse

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "skuId": "<skuId>",
      "warehouseId": "<warehouseId>",
      "quantity": "<quantity>"
    },
    "name": "vtex_update_inventory"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`skuId`	Yes	SKU ID
`warehouseId`	Yes	Warehouse ID
`quantity`	Yes	Quantity to set
`unlimitedQuantity`	No	Set unlimited quantity

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.0Jan 10, 2026

TDQS

C2.9/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It states this is an update operation, implying mutation, but doesn't disclose behavioral traits like required permissions, whether changes are reversible, rate limits, or what happens to existing inventory data. For a mutation tool with zero annotation coverage, this is a significant gap.

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. There's zero waste or redundancy, making it appropriately sized for the tool's function.

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?

Given this is a mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It lacks information on behavioral aspects (e.g., permissions, side effects), usage context, and what the tool returns, which are critical for safe and effective use.

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 four parameters (skuId, warehouseId, quantity, unlimitedQuantity) with clear descriptions. The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what's in the schema, but the baseline is 3 when schema coverage is high.

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 action ('Update'), resource ('inventory quantity'), and scope ('for a SKU in a warehouse'). It distinguishes itself from siblings like vtex_get_inventory (read vs. write) and vtex_list_inventory_by_warehouse (list vs. update), though it doesn't explicitly name these alternatives.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives like vtex_get_inventory or vtex_list_inventory_by_warehouse. The description implies usage for setting inventory quantities but doesn't specify prerequisites, constraints, or typical scenarios.

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

Deploy Server