yandex-marketing-mcp

yd_metrika_segment_update

Update a Yandex Metrika segment by specifying counter ID, segment ID, and optional new name or expression.

Instructions

Update a segment.

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": {
      "counter_id": "<counter_id>",
      "segment_id": "<segment_id>"
    },
    "name": "yd_metrika_segment_update"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`counter_id`	Yes	Counter ID
`segment_id`	Yes	Segment ID
`name`	No	New name
`expression`	No	New expression

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv2.0.0Jun 18, 2026

TDQS

C2.6/5.0

Behavior1/5

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

No annotations provided, and the description does not disclose behavioral traits like idempotency, required permissions, side effects, or error conditions. The one-word phrase 'Update a segment' is insufficient.

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 extremely concise—one sentence—but not verbose. However, it sacrifices completeness for brevity.

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

Completeness1/5

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

With 4 parameters (2 required), no output schema, and no annotations, the description is far too minimal. It fails to explain what the update entails, return values, or any prerequisites.

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%; the description adds no additional meaning to parameters beyond the schema definitions. Baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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?

The description clearly states the verb 'update' and resource 'segment', but does not differentiate from sibling tools like create, delete, or get segments.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as yd_metrika_segment_create or yd_metrika_segment_delete. Missing context for appropriate usage.

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

Deploy Server