Skip to main content
Glama
logic-arts-official

scaleway-ops-mcp-server

Update Scaleway API Key

scaleway_iam_update_api_key
Idempotent

Update an existing API key's description, expiry, or default_project_id without rotating the secret, preserving the access/secret key pair to avoid breaking deployed services.

Instructions

Change an existing API key's description, expiry, or default_project_id WITHOUT rotating its secret - the access_key/secret_key pair itself never changes. Use this instead of delete+recreate for a metadata-only change (e.g. extending an expiry before it lapses, or fixing a stale description); delete+recreate would mint a new secret and break anything already deployed with the old one. Only the fields you pass are changed; omitted fields are left as-is.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
access_keyYesThe access_key (not secret_key) of the key to update, e.g. 'SCWXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX'.
expires_atNoNew RFC3339 expiry, e.g. '2027-08-12T00:00:00Z'. Omit to leave unchanged - there is no way to clear an existing expiry back to 'never', only to set a new one.
descriptionNoNew description. Omit to leave unchanged.
default_project_idNoNew default Project for Object Storage operations with this key. Omit to leave unchanged.
Behavior5/5

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

The description adds significant context beyond the annotations. While annotations confirm it is not read-only (`readOnlyHint: false`) and not destructive (`destructiveHint: false`), the description clarifies the 'patch' semantics: 'Only the fields you pass are changed; omitted fields are left as-is.' This is crucial for safe invocation and is not deducible from the schema or annotations alone. The exception for `expires_at` ('there is no way to clear an existing expiry back to 'never'') is a perfect example of transparent behavioral disclosure.

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 highly efficient. The opening sentence front-loads the verb, resource, and key behavioral constraint ('WITHOUT rotating its secret'). The second sentence provides the 'why' and 'when'. The final sentence clarifies the idempotent/patch-like behavior. Every sentence serves a distinct purpose with no waste, and the structure is logical for a decision-making agent.

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?

Given the tool's moderate complexity (4 params, no nested objects, no output schema), the description is complete. It covers purpose, critical behavioral nuance (idempotency via patching), safety warning (secret not rotated), and a specific parameter caveat (unchangeable expiry). The agent has all the information needed to invoke this tool safely and correctly without any external reference.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters5/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Although schema description coverage is 100%, the tool description adds immense value. For the `expires_at` parameter, it explicitly warns that 'there is no way to clear an existing expiry back to 'never', only to set a new one', which is a critical caveat not present in the schema. The description's opening sentence also groups the purpose of all mutable parameters, reinforcing that they are all metadata-only changes. This elevates the param docs from merely descriptive to prescriptive.

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?

The description uses a strong verb ('Change') and clearly specifies the resource ('an existing API key's description, expiry, or default_project_id'). It immediately distinguishes itself from sibling tools like `scaleway_iam_delete_api_key` and `scaleway_iam_create_api_key` by emphasizing that it does NOT rotate the secret. This makes the tool's specific purpose within the IAM API key lifecycle unmistakable.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

The description provides excellent usage guidance. It explicitly states when to use this tool ('instead of delete+recreate for a metadata-only change') and gives concrete examples ('extending an expiry before it lapses, or fixing a stale description'). It also explains the negative consequence of the alternative ('delete+recreate would mint a new secret and break anything already deployed'), which is critical decision-making information for an agent.

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/logic-arts-official/scaleway-ops-mcp-server'

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