atlassian-marketplace-mcp

promotions_update

Destructive

Update a promotion's fields such as name, dates, discount percent, or usage limits. Only supplied fields change.

Instructions

Update a promotion (PATCH — only supplied fields change).

📖 Spec (PATCH /catalog/partners/{partnerId}/promotions/{promotionId}): https://developer.atlassian.com/platform/marketplace/rest/v1/api-group-promotions/#api-marketplace-catalog-partners-partnerid-promotions-promotionid-patch

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "promotionId": "<promotionId>"
    },
    "name": "promotions_update"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`name`	No
`maxUses`	No
`startDate`	No
`promotionId`	Yes
`expirationDate`	No
`discountPercent`	No
`allowedBillingCycles`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.3.2Jul 17, 2026

TDQS

A4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Description adds PATCH semantics and partial update behavior beyond annotations (destructiveHint=true). With annotations present, this is sufficient.

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?

Description is one succinct sentence with a link, front-loading the key behavior.

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?

No output schema is provided, and the description does not mention return values or success criteria. The external link helps but does not fully compensate for the missing context.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters2/5

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 parameter-level details. Parameter names are somewhat self-explanatory, but the description should compensate for the missing schema 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?

The description clearly states it updates a promotion using PATCH, specifying that only supplied fields change. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like promotions_create and promotions_get.

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 implies usage via 'PATCH — only supplied fields change' and siblings provide alternatives, but it lacks explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance.

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

Deploy Server