easysociable-mcp

Update image

update_image

Modify metadata fields such as name or rightsStatus for an existing image asset using its imageId. Rename images or change categorization tags with partial updates that leave other fields unchanged.

Instructions

Update metadata fields (such as human-readable name or rightsStatus) for an existing image asset by imageId. Call to rename images or change categorization tags. Do NOT use to record legal commercial compliance attestations (use attest_image instead) or to replace image binary pixels (use import_image to upload a new asset). Requires workspace owner authorization. Safe partial update: only provided fields are modified. Returns updated Image asset record.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`name`	No	Updated human-readable asset title.
`imageId`	Yes	The unique image asset identifier to update.
`rightsStatus`	No	Updated rights status: licensed_for_publish \| user_owned \| generated

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`name`	No	Updated title.
`imageId`	No	Image asset ID.
`rightsStatus`	No	Updated rights status.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedv0.1.17Oct 5, 2026

changedOutput schema / (root)

Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "properties": {
+    "imageId": {
+      "description": "Image asset ID.",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "name": {
+      "description": "Updated title.",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "rightsStatus": {
+      "description": "Updated rights status.",
+      "type": "string"
+    }
+  },
+  "type": "object"
+}

Changed3 schema fields changedv0.1.16Oct 5, 2026
- addedInput schema / properties / imageId / description
```
Added value: +"The unique image asset identifier to update."
```
- addedInput schema / properties / name / description
```
Added value: +"Updated human-readable asset title."
```
- addedInput schema / properties / rightsStatus / description
```
Added value: +"Updated rights status: licensed_for_publish | user_owned | generated"
```
Addedv0.1.15Oct 5, 2026

TDQS

A4.5/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already cover the mutation/safety profile (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=false), but the description adds context the annotations cannot: the workspace-owner authorization requirement and the partial-update guarantee that only provided fields are modified. It stops short of noting reversibility or idempotency nuances that would earn a 5.

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?

Front-loads purpose, then usage, then exclusions, then constraints and return. Every sentence carries distinct information; nothing is repeated from the title or schema.

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?

For a 3-parameter mutation with annotations, a 100%-covered schema, and an output schema, the description supplies the missing behavioral pieces (authorization, partial-update semantics, sibling routing). An agent has everything needed to invoke it correctly.

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 three parameters including the rightsStatus value set. The description restates name/rightsStatus and imageId as the identifier but adds no format or constraint detail beyond the schema; baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb (update), resource (image metadata), the fields in scope (name, rightsStatus), and the lookup key (imageId). It also explicitly distinguishes itself from attest_image and import_image, so an agent can route correctly without opening any schema.

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?

Gives positive triggers ('rename images or change categorization tags') and explicit exclusions with the correct alternative for each ('Do NOT use to record legal commercial compliance attestations (use attest_image instead) or to replace image binary pixels (use import_image)'). Also states the authorization prerequisite (workspace owner).

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