Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Amazon Connect MCP Server

Amazon Connect MCP Server

by mundurragacl
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Remote

cases_update_template

Update an existing Amazon Connect case template by its template ID and domain ID, optionally revising its name and description.

Instructions

Update a case template.

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": {
      "domain_id": "<domain_id>",
      "template_id": "<template_id>"
    },
    "name": "cases_update_template"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameNo
domain_idYes
descriptionNo
template_idYes

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

C2.3/5.0
Behavior1/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It only states 'Update a case template' and does not reveal side effects, idempotency, required permissions, or how missing/optional fields are handled, providing no behavioral context.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single concise sentence with no fluff, but it is under-specified. While it is appropriately short, the brevity sacrifices essential information, making it less useful than a more balanced description.

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?

The tool has four parameters and no annotations, yet the description provides no operational context. Although an output schema exists and return values need not be explained, the description still fails to explain the update semantics or parameter interactions, leaving the agent under-informed.

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

Parameters1/5

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

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate by explaining parameters. It does not mention any of the four parameters (name, domain_id, description, template_id), adding no meaning beyond the raw schema definitions.

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 'Update a case template' clearly identifies the action (update) and resource (case template), distinguishing it from siblings like cases_create_template and cases_get_template. However, it lacks any additional scope or elaboration, so it does not fully meet the highest standard.

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 usage guidelines are provided. The description does not mention when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor any prerequisites or exclusions, leaving the agent without guidance on selecting it.

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