TimeLib MCP

update_product

Update existing products in a Medusa store by modifying fields like title, description, status, thumbnail, or collection ID, including publishing products by setting status to published.

Instructions

Update fields on an existing product (title, description, status, thumbnail, collection_id, etc.). Only include fields you want to change. To publish: set status='published'.

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": {
      "id": "<id>"
    },
    "name": "update_product"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`id`	Yes
`title`	No
`handle`	No
`status`	No
`subtitle`	No
`thumbnail`	No
`description`	No
`collection_id`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.0Aug 4, 2026

TDQS

A3.8/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

No annotations provided, so description carries the burden. The description discloses partial-update behavior and the publish mechanism, but doesn't state what happens to fields not specified (whether they're preserved), whether collection_id must reference an existing collection, or any auth/permission requirements. Mutation is implied by 'Update' but reversible behavior isn't documented.

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?

Focused two-sentence description with no wasted words. The publish example is concrete and useful. Could be marginally more structured but is cleanly front-loaded with the primary purpose.

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 should clarify more: whether unspecified fields are preserved (partial vs. full replace), validation constraints, and response behavior. The partial-update hint and publish example are helpful but the tool leaves meaningful ambiguity for an agent deciding how to invoke it safely.

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 0%, so the description carries full burden for the 8 parameters. The description lists several parameter names (title, description, status, thumbnail, collection_id) and explains the status='published' effect, but handle, subtitle remain undocumented in both schema and description. It adds some meaning beyond the bare schema but doesn't compensate for the full coverage gap.

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?

Clear verb+resource ('Update fields on an existing product') with explicit enumerated fields (title, description, status, thumbnail, collection_id). Distinguishes from create_product and delete_product siblings by focusing on partial updates.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

States 'Only include fields you want to change' which clarifies partial-update semantics, and gives a concrete publishing example ('To publish: set status='published''). Lacks explicit when-not-to-use guidance but context is reasonably clear given sibling tool names.

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