Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Qualtrics MCP Server

Qualtrics MCP Server

by yrvelez
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

update_survey

Idempotent

Update survey metadata including name, active status, or expiration date.

Instructions

Update survey metadata such as name, active status, or expiration

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": {
      "surveyId": "<surveyId>"
    },
    "name": "update_survey"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameNoNew survey name
isActiveNoSet survey active/inactive status
surveyIdYesThe Qualtrics survey ID
expirationNoSurvey expiration date (ISO format)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

A3.5/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already provide idempotentHint and destructiveHint. The description adds that the tool updates metadata, which is consistent but not additional behavioral insight (e.g., effect on responses, versioning). No contradiction to annotations.

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?

Single sentence with 10 words, no redundancy, and directly states the tool's function. Every word adds value.

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?

No output schema, but the tool is a simple update. However, the coexistence with update_survey_metadata sibling is not addressed, leaving ambiguity. Given 4 params and annotations, the description is adequate but not fully complete in context.

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% for all 4 parameters, each with clear descriptions. The description merely repeats the field types ('name, active status, or expiration') without adding new meaning. 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?

The description uses a specific verb 'Update' and identifies the resource 'survey metadata' with examples of fields (name, active status, expiration). It clearly differentiates from sibling tools like delete_survey (destructive) and activate_survey/deactivate_survey (single-property toggles).

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this vs. specialized alternatives (activate_survey, deactivate_survey) or the similar update_survey_metadata sibling. The description does not state exclusions or context, leaving ambiguity for the agent.

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