Kraviona Admin MCP Server

update_site_settings

Update global site settings including address, logo, site name, contact info, social links, and SEO metadata to manage site configuration.

Instructions

Update global site settings

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_site_settings"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`address`	No
`logoUrl`	No
`siteUrl`	No
`siteName`	No
`faviconUrl`	No
`facebookUrl`	No
`linkedinUrl`	No
`siteTagline`	No
`contactEmail`	No
`contactPhone`	No
`twitterHandle`	No
`defaultMetaDesc`	No
`siteDescription`	No
`defaultMetaTitle`	No
`googleAnalyticsId`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.0Jul 26, 2026

TDQS

C2.4/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It only says 'Update', which implies mutation, but does not clarify whether it is a partial or full replacement, whether authentication is needed, or what the response is. Minimal transparency for a mutation tool.

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 short phrase, which is concise but not wasteful. However, it is too brief to be informative, bordering on under-specification. For a tool with many parameters, more content is needed.

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

Completeness1/5

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

Given 15 parameters, no output schema, no annotations, and no parameter documentation, the description is drastically incomplete. It does not specify the scope ('global site settings' is vague), update behavior (partial vs full), or any side effects. The agent has insufficient context to use the tool correctly.

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% and the description adds no information about the 15 parameters. None are explained, so the agent cannot infer which settings are affected or what values are expected. The description fails to compensate for the lack of schema descriptions.

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 states the verb 'Update' and the resource 'global site settings', clearly indicating the action and target. It distinguishes from the sibling 'get_site_settings' by the action, but does not differentiate further from other update tools. No tautology or vagueness.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'get_site_settings' or other update tools. No context on prerequisites, complementarity, or exclusions. The description provides no usage direction.

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

update_site_settingsC