Paperless MCP

Update Document

update_document

Idempotent

Update selected fields of a document in Paperless-NGX, including title, tags, correspondent, and metadata. Note: responses omit OCR content; retrieve it separately for updated text.

Instructions

Patch selected fields on a document.

The response strips OCR content. Use get_document_content or a transfer link when the updated text is needed.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`patch`	Yes
`document_id`	Yes

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`id`	Yes
`tags`	No
`added`	No
`notes`	No
`owner`	No
`title`	Yes
`content`	No
`created`	Yes
`web_url`	No
`modified`	No
`page_count`	No
`created_date`	No
`storage_path`	No
`correspondent`	No
`custom_fields`	No
`document_type`	No
`user_can_change`	No
`archived_file_name`	No
`original_file_name`	No
`archive_serial_number`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedv2.1.0Sep 21, 2026
- removedInput schema / properties / include_content
```
Removed value: -{
-  "default": false,
-  "type": "boolean"
-}
```
First observedv1.0.1Jul 8, 2026

TDQS

A4.1/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

The description discloses that the response strips OCR content, a behavioral trait not present in the annotations. The annotations already mark the operation as non-read-only, non-destructive, and idempotent, and the description aligns with those without contradiction.

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 sentences with the purpose stated first and a targeted behavioral note second. No filler words, no repetition of schema information, and every sentence earns its place.

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?

Given the nested `patch` object and existing output schema, the description covers the key behavioral quirk (content stripping) but leaves some patch semantics implicit, such as whether null clears fields or which fields are typically updated together. Adequate, but a bit more detail on patch semantics would improve completeness.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description must compensate for parameter meaning. 'Patch selected fields' conveys partial-update semantics and the content-stripping note relates to the `content` field, but it does not explain null behavior, per-field details, or the relationship between fields. The schema provides field names and types, so the description adds minimal but meaningful value.

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?

The first sentence, 'Patch selected fields on a document,' names a specific verb (patch), resource (document), and scope (selected fields). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like update_document_type or bulk_edit_documents, which target different resources or operations.

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?

The description gives an explicit alternative for a specific need: use get_document_content or a transfer link when updated text is needed after the response strips OCR content. However, it does not explain broader when-to-use conditions versus sibling tools like bulk_edit_documents or mention prerequisites such as permissions.

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

Deploy Server