Skip to main content
Glama
soil-dev

capsulemcp

update_party

Update a party's top-level fields: name, about, owner, team, organisation, and custom fields. Appends emails, phones, addresses, and websites; use dedicated tools for precise changes.

Instructions

Update top-level fields on an existing party (about, firstName/lastName/name/title/jobTitle, ownerId, teamId, organisationId). ownerId and teamId both accept null to unassign — the combination {ownerId: null, teamId: <id>} puts a party into 'team-owned, no specific user' state (the common pattern when transferring ownership to a team after a user departs). For PERSON parties, organisationId links to an organisation or null unlinks; for ORGANISATION parties Capsule silently ignores organisationId. Only the fields you provide are changed. Child arrays (emailAddresses / phoneNumbers / addresses / websites) on this tool are APPEND-ONLY: items are merged into the existing list, not replaced. For surgical changes — replacing one email, removing one phone number, fixing the type on one address — use the dedicated atomic tools: add_party_email_address / remove_party_email_address_by_id (and the phone/address/website equivalents).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idNo
firstNameNo
lastNameNo
titleNo
jobTitleNo
nameNo
organisationIdNoFor PERSON parties: link to an organisation by id, or `null` to unlink (the person becomes an orphan / standalone record). Discover org IDs via search_parties / filter_parties with type=organisation. For ORGANISATION parties: silently ignored by Capsule's API — organisations don't have a parent organisation in the data model. Empirically verified in v1.6.3 wire-trace; no client-side type guard since the no-op is harmless.
fieldsNoSet custom field values on this record. PARTIAL UPDATE: only the definitions you list are touched; any field NOT in this array is left unchanged. Discover available definitions via list_custom_fields; read current values via get_party with embed='fields'.
aboutNo
emailAddressesNoAPPEND-ONLY: items are merged into the existing list, never replaced. For atomic add/remove/replace use add_party_email_address and remove_party_email_address_by_id. Passing `[]` here is a silent no-op (does not clear the list and does not advance updatedAt).
phoneNumbersNoAPPEND-ONLY: items are merged into the existing list, never replaced. For atomic add/remove/replace use add_party_phone_number and remove_party_phone_number_by_id.
addressesNoAPPEND-ONLY: items are merged into the existing list, never replaced. For atomic add/remove/replace use add_party_address and remove_party_address_by_id. The `country` field is mapped through Capsule's country dictionary — see `add_party_address.country` for the dictionary edges (small canonical-English-name list; inputs not in the dictionary are REJECTED with 422, not silently dropped).
websitesNoAPPEND-ONLY: items are merged into the existing list, never replaced. For atomic add/remove/replace use add_party_website and remove_party_website_by_id.
ownerIdNoPass a user ID to set, or `null` to unassign (verified empirically in v1.6.4 wire-trace — Capsule accepts `owner: null` on PUT /parties/:id for both persons and organisations). Discover IDs via list_users. WARNING: Capsule's PUT on /parties has the same asymmetric owner/team semantic documented in NOTES-ON-CAPSULE-API.md §27 for /kases — setting `owner` while omitting `team` is plausibly clearing-prone. When you supply `ownerId` and omit `teamId`, this connector reads the party's current team and includes it in the PUT body to preserve it across the owner change. Supply `teamId` explicitly to change it.
teamIdNoAssign to team ID (discover via list_teams). Pass a team ID to set, or `null` to unassign. Capsule enforces the owner∈team membership constraint — passing a team the current owner doesn't belong to returns 422 'owner is not a member of the team'. Combine `ownerId: null` + `teamId: <T>` in one call to transfer a party to team-ownership with no specific user (verified empirically in v1.6.4 wire-trace; the membership rule doesn't fire when owner is null).
Behavior5/5

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

The description discloses many behavioral details beyond annotations: append-only for email/phone/address/websites, silent no-op for empty arrays, quirks about organisationId (silently ignored for ORGANISATION parties), ownerId/teamId interactions (preserving team when ownerId set alone), and custom field partial update with edge cases. Annotations only indicate mutability, so description adds significant value.

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 detailed but well-structured: it starts with a clear summary, then lists fields, then explains specific behaviors. Every sentence adds value, though it could be slightly more compact. Still, it's easy to scan and front-loaded.

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?

Given 15 parameters, no required params, no output schema, the description covers all major behavioral aspects: what is updated, append-only constraints, ownership and team management, organisationId handling, and custom field partial update. It also references sibling tools for surgical changes. No gaps noted.

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

Parameters4/5

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

Schema coverage is 53%, with many parameters already described in the schema. However, the description adds essential context like append-only behavior, ownership transfer semantics, and custom field quirks (e.g., BOOLEAN null rejection). This compensation justifies a 4.

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 the verb 'Update' and the resource 'party', lists the specific top-level fields that can be modified, and distinguishes from sibling tools like the atomic add/remove tools for child arrays. It explicitly says 'For surgical changes... use the dedicated atomic tools.'

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 explicitly tells when to use this tool (update top-level fields) and when to use alternatives (the dedicated atomic tools for surgical changes on child arrays). It also explains the partial update behavior ('Only the fields you provide are changed') and caveats like the 'team-owned, no specific user' state.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/soil-dev/capsulemcp'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server