Baasix MCP Server

baasix_update_permission

Update an existing permission by ID to modify its allowed actions, fields, role, collection, conditions, or default values.

Instructions

Update an existing permission

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": {
      "id": "<id>"
    },
    "name": "baasix_update_permission"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`id`	Yes	Permission ID
`action`	No	Permission action
`fields`	No	Allowed fields
`role_Id`	No	Role ID
`collection`	No	Collection name
`conditions`	No	Permission conditions
`defaultValues`	No	Default values for creation
`relConditions`	No	Relationship conditions

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.7Aug 30, 2026

TDQS

C2.9/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It indicates this is a mutant operation, but it does not explain whether fields are partially updated or fully replaced, what happens to omitted fields, what permissions are required, or what side effects may occur.

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 a single concise sentence with no wasted words. It is efficient and front-loaded, though it sacrifices useful detail for brevity.

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

Completeness2/5

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

For a tool with 8 parameters, no output schema, no annotations, and a close sibling named update_permissions, this description is not complete enough. It does not tell the agent about update semantics, the contents of nested objects, or how to distinguish this tool from similar permission-related tools.

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 100%, so the schema already documents all eight parameters. The description adds no additional parameter meaning beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline 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 a specific verb and resource: 'Update an existing permission.' It is easy to understand what the tool does, but it does not distinguish this singular tool from its sibling 'baasix_update_permissions,' which could update multiple permissions.

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?

There is no guidance about when to use this tool versus alternatives like create_permission, delete_permission, or the plural update_permissions. The description gives no context for when this should be preferred, no prerequisites, and no exclusions.

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

Deploy Server