Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Qualtrics MCP Server

Qualtrics MCP Server

by yrvelez
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

update_survey_flow

DestructiveIdempotent

Replace the entire survey flow tree: retrieve the current flow, modify it, then submit the complete tree.

Instructions

Replace the entire survey flow tree. Use get_survey_flow first to get the current flow, modify it, then pass the full tree back.

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_flow"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
flowNoThe complete flow tree object (same structure returned by get_survey_flow)
surveyIdYesThe Qualtrics survey ID

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already indicate idempotentHint: true and destructiveHint: true. The description adds that the entire tree is replaced and requires retrieving the current flow first, but does not disclose additional traits like permissions or what happens to existing elements not in the new tree.

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?

Two sentences: the first states the purpose, the second provides usage instructions. No redundant information, front-loaded with key action. Extremely concise.

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 exists, so the description should ideally indicate what the tool returns (e.g., success confirmation). It does not. While the usage flow is clear, missing return value details and error conditions reduce completeness.

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 descriptions for both parameters. The description reinforces that 'flow' should be the full tree object, but does not add new semantic meaning beyond the schema. 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 clearly states 'Replace the entire survey flow tree,' specifying the action (replace) and resource (survey flow tree). It distinguishes from sibling tools like insert_flow_element and update_flow_element, which modify parts of the flow.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

The description explicitly instructs to 'Use get_survey_flow first to get the current flow, modify it, then pass the full tree back.' This provides a clear workflow and indicates this tool is for complete replacements, not partial updates.

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