Skip to main content
Glama
mpeirone

zabbix-mcp-server

user_update

Modify user details in Zabbix by updating username, name, surname, or email using the specified user ID. Returns JSON-formatted update results for streamlined user management.

Instructions

Update an existing user in Zabbix.

Args:
    userid: User ID to update
    username: New username
    name: New first name
    surname: New last name
    email: New email address
    
Returns:
    str: JSON formatted update result

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
emailNo
nameNo
surnameNo
useridYes
usernameNo

Implementation Reference

  • The `user_update` MCP tool implementation. This function is decorated with `@mcp.tool()` which registers it as an MCP tool named 'user_update'. It handles updating Zabbix user information (username, name, surname, email) using the Zabbix API client, with read-only validation and JSON response formatting.
    @mcp.tool()
    def user_update(userid: str, username: Optional[str] = None,
                    name: Optional[str] = None, surname: Optional[str] = None,
                    email: Optional[str] = None) -> str:
        """Update an existing user in Zabbix.
        
        Args:
            userid: User ID to update
            username: New username
            name: New first name
            surname: New last name
            email: New email address
            
        Returns:
            str: JSON formatted update result
        """
        validate_read_only()
        
        client = get_zabbix_client()
        params = {"userid": userid}
        
        if username:
            params["username"] = username
        if name:
            params["name"] = name
        if surname:
            params["surname"] = surname
        if email:
            params["email"] = email
        
        result = client.user.update(**params)
        return format_response(result)
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It states this is an update operation (implying mutation) and mentions the return format ('JSON formatted update result'), but doesn't cover critical aspects like authentication requirements, permission levels, whether changes are reversible, error conditions, or rate limits.

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?

The description is well-structured with clear sections (Args, Returns) and uses minimal sentences. The first sentence establishes purpose, followed by organized parameter documentation. No wasted words, though the 'JSON formatted update result' could be slightly more specific.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description covers basic purpose and parameters adequately but lacks critical behavioral context. It doesn't explain what happens with partial updates, error handling, or system implications. The return value description is minimal ('JSON formatted update result').

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description provides meaningful parameter documentation by listing all 5 parameters with brief explanations of what each represents. This significantly compensates for the schema gap, though it doesn't explain parameter interactions or that only userid is required.

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 verb ('Update') and resource ('an existing user in Zabbix'), making the purpose immediately understandable. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like user_create or user_delete, though the 'existing user' phrasing implies it's for updates rather than creation.

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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like user_create or user_delete. It mentions 'existing user' which implies prerequisites, but offers no explicit when/when-not instructions or comparison with 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

Related 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/mpeirone/zabbix-mcp-server'

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