Skip to main content
Glama
qpiai

Zoho Projects MCP Server

by qpiai

update_project

Modify project details like name, description, dates, or status in Zoho Projects to keep project information current and accurate.

Instructions

Update an existing project

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
project_idYesProject ID
nameNoProject name
descriptionNoProject description
start_dateNoStart date (YYYY-MM-DD)
end_dateNoEnd date (YYYY-MM-DD)
statusNoProject status

Implementation Reference

  • Core handler function that executes the update_project tool: destructures params to get project_id and update data, sends PATCH request to Zoho Projects API endpoint, and returns formatted success response with API data.
    private async updateProject(params: any) {
      const { project_id, ...updateData } = params;
      const data = await this.makeRequest(
        `/portal/${this.config.portalId}/projects/${project_id}`,
        "PATCH",
        updateData
      );
      return {
        content: [
          {
            type: "text",
            text: `Project updated successfully:\n${JSON.stringify(data, null, 2)}`,
          },
        ],
      };
    }
  • Identical core handler function for update_project tool in the stdio server version.
    private async updateProject(params: any) {
      const { project_id, ...updateData } = params;
      const data = await this.makeRequest(
        `/portal/${this.config.portalId}/projects/${project_id}`,
        "PATCH",
        updateData
      );
      return {
        content: [
          {
            type: "text",
            text: `Project updated successfully:\n${JSON.stringify(data, null, 2)}`,
          },
        ],
      };
    }
  • Input schema definition for the update_project tool, specifying parameters like project_id (required), name, description, dates, and status.
    {
      name: "update_project",
      description: "Update an existing project",
      inputSchema: {
        type: "object",
        properties: {
          project_id: { type: "string", description: "Project ID" },
          name: { type: "string", description: "Project name" },
          description: { type: "string", description: "Project description" },
          start_date: {
            type: "string",
            description: "Start date (YYYY-MM-DD)",
          },
          end_date: { type: "string", description: "End date (YYYY-MM-DD)" },
          status: {
            type: "string",
            description: "Project status",
            enum: ["active", "template", "archived"],
          },
        },
        required: ["project_id"],
      },
    },
  • Tool dispatch/registration in the CallToolRequestSchema handler switch statement, routing 'update_project' calls to the updateProject method.
      return await this.createProject(params);
    case "update_project":
      return await this.updateProject(params);
    case "delete_project":
      return await this.deleteProject(params.project_id);
  • src/index.ts:566-570 (registration)
    Tool dispatch in stdio version's CallToolRequestSchema switch, calling updateProject for 'update_project'.
    case "update_project":
      return await this.updateProject(params);
    case "delete_project":
      return await this.deleteProject(params.project_id);
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. 'Update an existing project' implies a mutation operation but reveals nothing about permissions needed, whether changes are reversible, rate limits, or what happens to unspecified fields. This is inadequate for a mutation tool with zero annotation coverage.

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?

The description is a single, efficient sentence with zero wasted words. It's appropriately sized for its purpose and front-loaded with the essential action and resource.

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

Completeness2/5

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

For a mutation tool with 6 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is insufficient. It doesn't explain what the tool returns, error conditions, or behavioral nuances. The agent would lack critical context for proper invocation despite the comprehensive parameter schema.

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?

The description adds no parameter information beyond what's already in the schema, which has 100% coverage with clear descriptions for all 6 parameters. The baseline score of 3 reflects that the schema does the heavy lifting, and the description doesn't compensate with additional context like format examples or constraints.

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 clearly states the verb ('update') and resource ('an existing project'), making the purpose immediately understandable. However, it doesn't differentiate this tool from its sibling 'update_issue' and 'update_task', which follow the same pattern for different resources.

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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'create_project' or 'delete_project', nor does it mention prerequisites or constraints. It simply states what the tool does without context for selection.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/qpiai/zoho-projects-mcp'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server