m365-mcp

Update Item

m365_update

Idempotent

Update properties of existing emails, folders, contacts, or OneDrive items: mark read, flag, set importance/categories, rename, or edit contact details. Returns changed fields.

Instructions

Change properties of an existing email, mail folder, contact or OneDrive item: mark read or unread, flag, set importance or categories, Focused/Other, rename folders and files, or edit contact details. Supply the *_changes object that matches resource. Not for events (calendar_update_event), inbox rules (email_rule_manage) or file contents (drive_upload). Returns the changed field names.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`id`	Yes	Item ID.
`resource`	Yes	Type of item.
`account_id`	No	Account ID or email address. Omit when only one account is signed in.
`email_changes`	No	Required when resource='email'.
`contact_changes`	No	Required when resource='contact'. Only supplied fields change; lists replace the existing list.
`drive_item_changes`	No	Required when resource='drive_item'.
`email_folder_changes`	No	Required when resource='email_folder'.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`id`	Yes
`status`	Yes
`summary`	Yes	One-line human summary. The tool's text content is this result serialized as JSON (summary included), so a client that ignores structuredContent still sees every field.
`resource`	Yes
`changed_fields`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Addedv1.0.0Sep 29, 2026

TDQS

A4.2/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, idempotentHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds some context (the *_changes object must match the resource) but says nothing about permissions, how categories_add/remove/set interact, or partial-update semantics beyond what the schema states.

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?

Dense but front-loaded: the capability list, then the invocation rule, then the exclusions, then the return summary. Every clause carries distinct information.

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?

Covers the resource types, mutation surface, invocation pattern and sibling boundaries, which is enough to call it correctly. Minor gaps remain on authorization needs and field-conflict behavior, and the return-value sentence is largely redundant given an output schema exists.

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 100%, so the schema already documents every parameter including the per-resource conditional requirements. The description's contribution ('Supply the *_changes object that matches resource') only restates the resource-to-object linkage already encoded in the schema's 'Required when resource=...' descriptions.

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?

States a specific verb (Change properties) plus the resource set (email, mail folder, contact, OneDrive item) and enumerates the concrete mutations available (read/unread, flag, importance, categories, Focused/Other, rename, contact details). It also distinguishes itself from siblings by naming what it does NOT cover.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

Gives explicit when-not rules with named alternatives: not for events (calendar_update_event), inbox rules (email_rule_manage), or file contents (drive_upload). It also tells the caller how to invoke it: supply the *_changes object matching the resource.

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