IRIS MCP Blueprint

update_production

Apply pending configuration changes to the active production system, executing updates equivalent to the Management Portal's Update button.

Instructions

Apply pending configuration changes to the running production (equivalent to clicking 'Update' in the Management Portal).

Calls ##class(Ens.Director).UpdateProduction(). Only the active production is updated; production_name is reserved for future use and ignored.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "update_production"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`production_name`	No

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.4Jun 12, 2026

TDQS

A4.2/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It reveals the underlying method call and parameter behavior, but does not describe error cases or what happens if no changes are pending.

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?

Two concise sentences that immediately convey purpose and key details; no unnecessary words.

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

Completeness4/5

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

Given one parameter and an output schema, the description covers core behavior and parameter meaning; could add more on return values or error handling but is sufficient for a simple tool.

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?

Schema has 0% coverage with one parameter (production_name) lacking description. Description clarifies that it is reserved and ignored, adding crucial meaning beyond the schema.

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?

Clearly states it applies pending configuration changes to the running production, using specific verb and resource, and distinguishes from sibling tools like start_production or stop_production.

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?

Indicates when to use (apply pending changes), notes that only active production is updated and production_name is ignored, but does not explicitly mention when not to use or alternatives.

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