Skip to main content
Glama
thenavidm

Beehiiv MCP Server

by thenavidm
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

Update publication field

update_publication_field
Destructive

Update a publication field's label, status, endpoint, default value, or response keys. This changes account state and needs confirm=true.

Instructions

Update publication field. Changes account state and requires confirm=true for the user-requested action. OAuth integrations require publication_fields:write.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
statusNoSet to `archived` to archive the field, or `active` to restore it. Left unchanged when omitted.
accountNoNamed private account from BEEHIIV_ACCOUNTS. Defaults to BEEHIIV_DEFAULT_ACCOUNT or the first configured account.
confirmNoSet true only when the user asked for exactly this action.
displayNoThe human readable label for the field.
payloadNoComplete JSON body instead of individual body flags. Supports nullable fields and nested bulk structures. Cannot be combined with body flags or payload_file.
endpoint_urlNoThe URL the value is retrieved from. Only supported for fetched fields. May contain merge tags that resolve per publication.
payload_fileNoLocal JSON request body file, at most 5 MB. Contents are validated before the API call and are never logged.
default_valueNoThe value used for publications that have not set one of their own.
response_keysNo
publication_field_idYesThe prefixed ID of the publication field object

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed10 schema fields changedv3.0.1
    • addedInput schema / $defs
      Added value: +{
+  "response_keys": {
+    "description": "The keys declared within the fetched JSON response body. Replaces the existing list. Only supported for `json` fields. A `number` or `date` key also claims its format variants, so a key `temp_round2` is rejected with `RESPONSE_KEYS_CLASHES` beside a `number` key named `temp`.",
+    "items": {
+      "additionalProperties": false,
+      "properties": {
+        "key": {
+          "description": "The name of the key within the JSON response body.",
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        "kind": {
+          "description": "The type of value the key holds.",
+          "enum": [
+            "text",
+            "number",
+            "date",
+            "url",
+            "image_url"
+          ],
+          "title": "PublicationFieldResponseKeyKind",
+          "type": "string"
+        }
+      },
+      "required": [
+        "key",
+        "kind"
+      ],
+      "title": "PublicationFieldResponseKey",
+      "type": "object"
+    },
+    "type": "array"
+  }
+}
    • changedInput schema / properties / confirm / description
      Previous value: -"Must be true for every account mutation. Confirms only the user-requested action."New value: +"Set true only when the user asked for exactly this action."
    • addedInput schema / properties / payload / properties / response_keys / $ref
      Added value: +"#/$defs/response_keys"
    • removedInput schema / properties / payload / properties / response_keys / description
      Removed value: -"The keys declared within the fetched JSON response body. Replaces the existing list. Only supported for `json` fields. A `number` or `date` key also claims its format variants, so a key `temp_round2` is rejected with `RESPONSE_KEYS_CLASHES` beside a `number` key named `temp`."
    • removedInput schema / properties / payload / properties / response_keys / items
      Removed value: -{
-  "additionalProperties": false,
-  "properties": {
-    "key": {
-      "description": "The name of the key within the JSON response body.",
-      "type": "string"
-    },
-    "kind": {
-      "description": "The type of value the key holds.",
-      "enum": [
-        "text",
-        "number",
-        "date",
-        "url",
-        "image_url"
-      ],
-      "title": "PublicationFieldResponseKeyKind",
-      "type": "string"
-    }
-  },
-  "required": [
-    "key",
-    "kind"
-  ],
-  "title": "PublicationFieldResponseKey",
-  "type": "object"
-}
    • removedInput schema / properties / payload / properties / response_keys / type
      Removed value: -"array"
    • addedInput schema / properties / response_keys / $ref
      Added value: +"#/$defs/response_keys"
    • removedInput schema / properties / response_keys / description
      Removed value: -"The keys declared within the fetched JSON response body. Replaces the existing list. Only supported for `json` fields. A `number` or `date` key also claims its format variants, so a key `temp_round2` is rejected with `RESPONSE_KEYS_CLASHES` beside a `number` key named `temp`."
    • removedInput schema / properties / response_keys / items
      Removed value: -{
-  "additionalProperties": false,
-  "properties": {
-    "key": {
-      "description": "The name of the key within the JSON response body.",
-      "type": "string"
-    },
-    "kind": {
-      "description": "The type of value the key holds.",
-      "enum": [
-        "text",
-        "number",
-        "date",
-        "url",
-        "image_url"
-      ],
-      "title": "PublicationFieldResponseKeyKind",
-      "type": "string"
-    }
-  },
-  "required": [
-    "key",
-    "kind"
-  ],
-  "title": "PublicationFieldResponseKey",
-  "type": "object"
-}
    • removedInput schema / properties / response_keys / type
      Removed value: -"array"
  2. First observedv2.0.0

TDQS

B3.1/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, idempotentHint=false and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is known; the description goes further by naming the confirm gate that must be satisfied and the publication_fields:write OAuth scope. It does not explain what archiving via status does to dependent data, which is the one remaining behavioral gap.

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?

Three short sentences with the confirm requirement front-loaded alongside the mutation warning. The first sentence is pure redundancy with the title, which is the only waste in an otherwise tight definition.

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

Completeness3/5

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

For a 10-parameter destructive mutation with a nested payload object and no output schema, the description covers the highest-risk behaviors (confirm gate, auth scope) but omits consequences of status=archived, whether nested payload replaces existing keys, and the fact that payload cannot be combined with body flags — all of which the agent must infer from the schema alone.

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 description coverage is 90%, so the schema already documents status, payload, endpoint_url, response_keys, payload_file and confirm in detail. The description mentions confirm but adds no syntax, defaults, or mutual-exclusion nuance beyond what the schema's own descriptions provide.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose2/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The lead sentence 'Update publication field' is a tautological restatement of the tool name and title; it names no specific updatable aspects (status, display, endpoint_url, payload) even though they exist. The remaining sentences describe behavior and auth rather than what the tool actually modifies, so an agent learns little about purpose from the description text.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

It supplies one concrete usage condition — 'requires confirm=true for the user-requested action' — and the auth scope needed for OAuth integrations. However, it never contrasts this tool with close siblings such as publication_fields_values_update, create_publication_field, or get_publication_field, so the agent gets a condition but no routing 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