Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Basecamp MCP Server

Basecamp MCP Server

by stefanoverna
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

Update Basecamp Vault

basecamp_update_vault
Idempotent

Rename a Basecamp vault using its ID and a new title. Changes are applied immediately.

Instructions

Update the title of a vault (folder).

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": {
      "vault_id": "<vault_id>",
      "title": "<title>"
    },
    "name": "basecamp_update_vault"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
titleYesNew vault title
vault_idYesVault ID to update

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changedv1.2.1
    • removedInput schema / properties / bucket_id
      Removed value: -{
-  "description": "Project/bucket ID",
-  "type": "number"
-}
    • changedInput schema / required
      Previous value: -[
-  "bucket_id",
-  "vault_id",
-  "title"
-]New value: +[
+  "vault_id",
+  "title"
+]
  2. Addedv1.0.3

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already indicate idempotentHint=true and destructiveHint=false. The description adds minimal behavioral context beyond confirming it updates only the title, which is consistent but not additive.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence with no redundancy. Every word contributes to clarity.

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?

For a simple update tool with two parameters and good annotations, the description is adequate. It could explicitly state that only the title can be updated, but the completeness is satisfactory.

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%, with clear descriptions for both parameters. The description does not add extra meaning beyond what the schema provides.

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 action (update), the resource (vault), and the specific field (title), distinguishing it from create, get, and list vault tools.

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?

While the description is clear on what the tool does, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives. However, the context from sibling tool names provides implicit 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