linkding-mcp

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

linkding_update_bookmark

Idempotent

Update bookmark fields while keeping omitted values unchanged; preview changes with a dry-run before confirming the write.

Instructions

Update a bookmark. PATCH by default, or PUT when replace is true. Omitted fields stay unchanged. Auto-tagging rules are merged into tag_names on every update. Omit confirm for a dry-run.

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": {
      "id": "<id>"
    },
    "name": "linkding_update_bookmark"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`id`	Yes	Bookmark id.
`url`	No	Bookmark URL.
`notes`	No
`title`	No
`shared`	No
`unread`	No
`confirm`	No	Set to the boolean true to execute the write. Omit this field for a dry-run preview. false and the string true are rejected.
`replace`	No	When true, send PUT. Linkding still leaves omitted fields unchanged. url is required.
`tag_names`	No	Tag names. Linkding creates missing tags.
`description`	No
`is_archived`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Oct 23, 2026

TDQS

A4.1/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations only declare write/idempotent/openWorld, but the description adds substantive behavior: omitted fields stay unchanged, auto-tagging rules merge into tag_names on every update, and no-confirm yields a dry-run preview. These are exactly the non-obvious mutation traits an agent needs.

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?

Four dense sentences, each carrying load-bearing information (PATCH/PUT, unchanged fields, auto-tag merge, dry-run). The default-verb behavior is front-loaded.

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?

No output schema, and the description covers the highest-risk behaviors (PUT vs PATCH, mutation gating, auto-tag side effect). Some field-level semantics for the untagged optional params remain undocumented, but the critical call-correctness info is present.

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 coverage is 45% (<50%), so the description must compensate, and it explains confirm, replace, tag_names, and url-required-on-replace. However it says nothing about the other fields (notes, title, shared, unread, description, is_archived) which lack schema descriptions, leaving a real gap.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Update a bookmark') and immediately specifies the PATCH-vs-PUT semantics. No sibling in the list shares this resource, so sibling differentiation is naturally low-risk, but it doesn't explicitly say how it differs from e.g. linkding_archive_bookmark or update_bundle.

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?

Gives explicit conditional guidance: use replace=true to send PUT, omit confirm for a dry-run. That tells the agent how to invoke two non-obvious paths. It stops short of stating when to prefer this over linkding_archive_bookmark/unarchive_bookmark for flag changes.

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