Skip to main content
Glama
thenavidm

Gumloop MCP Server

by thenavidm
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Hybrid

Update evaluation

update_organization_evaluation
Destructive

Partially update an organization evaluation by sending only the fields to change. Merges config, replaces lists wholesale, and clears description with null.

Instructions

Partial update. Only the fields you send change. config is merged field by field; a list you send (criteria, tags, data_points) replaces that list wholesale. description: null clears the description.

Setting enabled: true requires at least one criterion, tag, or data point (400 organization_evaluation_empty_rubric) and at least one covered agent (400 organization_evaluation_no_targets). Emptying the rubric of an enabled evaluation pauses it. Explicit confirmation is required for this exact account operation. Runs can spend credits or trigger downstream actions; never resubmit unknown outcomes automatically.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
accountNoNamed private Gumloop account; selects private credentials and user/team identity.
confirmNoSet true only when the user asked for exactly this action.
evaluation_idYesID of the organization evaluation.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv3.0.0
    • changedInput schema / properties / confirm / description
      Previous value: -"Must be true for this exact requested account change, agent/flow execution, upload or deletion."New value: +"Set true only when the user asked for exactly this action."
  2. First observedv2.0.1

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations declare destructiveHint=true and non-idempotent, and the description adds real value beyond that: the exact 400 error codes on invalid enable, the pause-on-empty-rubric behavior, the credit-spending warning, and the confirmation requirement. This is genuinely useful behavioral context not in the schema.

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?

Front-loads the partial-update semantics in the first two sentences, then operational constraints, then the confirmation warning. Dense but every sentence carries information. Slightly heavy on back-to-back clauses.

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?

Covers mutation semantics, validation errors, side effects, and confirmation requirement for a destructive non-idempotent tool. No output schema, but a mutation returning the updated resource is expected, so return value isn't needed. Missing only a pointer to sibling alternatives.

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% and the schema thoroughly documents each field (id semantics, tag name casing, frequency enum, etc.). The description adds merge semantics for config and null-clears for description, which is real added value but overlap is high; baseline 3 is appropriate.

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?

States a specific verb (partial update) and resource, and immediately distinguishes semantics from sibling update tools (update_evaluation_config, set_organization_evaluation_targets) by clarifying that config merges field-by-field while lists replace wholesale and null clears description.

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?

Gives clear behavioral guidance: what happens when enabling, what happens when emptying the rubric, the confirmation requirement. Doesn't explicitly name sibling alternatives like update_evaluation_config, but the operational context is clear enough to select correctly.

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