Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
yandex-marketing-mcp

yandex-marketing-mcp

by skiddgoddamn
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

yd_metrika_label_update

Update a label's name in Yandex Metrica by providing its ID and the new name.

Instructions

Update a label.

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": {
      "label_id": "<label_id>",
      "name": "<name>"
    },
    "name": "yd_metrika_label_update"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
label_idYesLabel ID
nameYesNew label name

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv2.0.0

TDQS

C2.9/5.0
Behavior1/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden for behavioral traits, but it only says 'Update a label.' It discloses no side effects, permissions, or what happens if the label does not exist or the name is invalid.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single concise sentence that front-loads the purpose. It is not verbose, though it could benefit from slightly more detail without losing conciseness.

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?

Given the simple update operation with two parameters and no output schema, the description is too sparse. It fails to mention return values, effects, or any conditions, leaving gaps for the agent.

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 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema's parameter descriptions (label ID and new label name).

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 'Update a label' clearly states the verb (update) and resource (label), and it distinguishes this tool from sibling tools like create, delete, link, get, and unlink.

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?

No guidance is provided about when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., when to update vs. create or link). The description does not mention context or prerequisites.

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