Skip to main content
Glama
scottehastings16

Adobe Target MCP

by scottehastings16
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Local

updateABActivity

Update an existing A/B Test activity's complete definition, covering name, priority, experiences, locations, metrics, state, dates, and audiences. This PUT operation replaces the current activity configuration.

Instructions

Update an existing A/B Test activity definition. This can change the state, behavior, and configuration of an existing activity.

DEFAULT VALUES: This tool automatically applies default values from your configuration for any missing fields:

  • priority: Defaults to 5

  • workspace: Uses TARGET_WORKSPACE_ID if configured

  • analytics (A4T): Auto-fills dataCollectionHost and reportSuites if configured

  • metrics defaults: action type, success mboxes, etc.

You can override any default by explicitly providing the value.

USE CASES:

  • Modify activity name, priority, or configuration

  • Update experiences, locations, or metrics

  • Change activity state (saved, approved, deactivated)

  • Update dates (startsAt, endsAt)

  • Modify audience targeting or reporting audiences

NOTE: For ONLY changing activity state (saved/approved/deactivated), use updateActivityState tool instead. This tool is for full activity definition updates.

ACTIVITY STATES:

  • saved: Inactive state (for draft activities)

  • approved: Activity is live (requires startsAt and endsAt dates)

  • deactivated: Archived

  • deleted: Removed from UI

STATE BEHAVIOR WITH DATES (when state is "approved"):

  • startsAt in past + endsAt in future = Live

  • startsAt in past + endsAt in past = Ended

  • startsAt in future + endsAt in future = Scheduled

IMPORTANT NOTES:

  • 15-minute latency between API and UI

  • Activity stays in API-set state even if UI status changes (e.g., if you set to "approved" and end date passes, UI shows "Ended" but state remains "approved")

  • Workspace ID required for premium customers (must have "approver" privilege)

  • Provide complete activity object - this is a PUT request that replaces the existing definition

TYPICAL UPDATE STRUCTURE: { "id": 123456, "name": "Updated Activity Name", "state": "saved" | "approved", "priority": 5, "startsAt": "2024-01-01T00:00:00Z", // required if state is "approved" "endsAt": "2024-12-31T23:59:59Z", // required if state is "approved" "locations": { "mboxes": [ { "name": "target-global-mbox", "experiences": [...] } ] }, "experiences": [...], "metrics": [...], "workspace": "workspaceId" // for premium customers }

OPTIONAL FIELDS:

  • entryConstraint (visitor percentage, mbox constraints)

  • reportingAudiences

  • analytics (A4T integration)

  • propertyIds

  • views (for SPA)

  • applicationContext (channel, device type, etc.)

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYesActivity ID
activityYesComplete updated activity definition object (PUT request - replaces existing definition)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv2.0.0

TDQS

A5/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden, and it exceeds it. It discloses that this is a PUT request that replaces the existing definition, explains default value application, notes 15-minute API-to-UI latency, and warns that the activity state in the API may diverge from UI status. It also flags workspace privilege requirements for premium customers.

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 long but extremely well-structured with clear headers for defaults, use cases, states, behavioral notes, and a typical structure. Every section adds necessary information for correctly calling the tool, and the most critical facts (PUT semantics, defaults, state behavior) are front-loaded. Nothing feels redundant or irrelevant.

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

Completeness5/5

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

This is a complex tool with nested objects and no output schema or annotations, yet the description covers defaults, required fields per state, state transitions, latency, permissions, and optional configuration fields. An agent has enough context to construct a valid request and anticipate system behavior. The only missing piece is return value details, but that is acceptable given the complexity and lack of output schema.

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

Parameters5/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Although the schema already describes both parameters at 100% coverage, the description adds substantial meaning: it clarifies that 'activity' contains a complete definition object, provides a typical update structure, lists optional fields, and explains required dates for approved state. This goes well beyond the schema's minimal 'Activity ID' and 'Complete updated activity definition object' 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 an existing A/B Test activity definition, with a specific verb and resource, and lists concrete use cases. It explicitly distinguishes itself from updateActivityState, saying that tool is for state-only changes whereas this one is for full definition updates. This removes ambiguity about which sibling tool to use.

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?

The description provides explicit when-to-use guidance via a USE CASES section and names the alternative tool for state-only changes. It also gives activity state definitions and state-with-dates behavior, so an agent knows exactly when to invoke this tool versus updateActivityState. This is strong, actionable guidance.

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