Skip to main content
Glama

Update an HTML block

update_block
Idempotent

Update an existing HTML block by UUID with partial field changes, preserving omitted data bindings. Preview the exact write with dry_run before committing.

Instructions

Update an existing HTML block by UUID. Only the fields you pass change — the server merges them over the current record, so an omitted ui_queries keeps the existing data binding. Authoring rules validate only your delta; violations the stored block already has are grandfathered to warnings, never blockers. dry_run:true previews the exact write.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
cssNoNew CSS.
dataNoLegacy query-config object — ignored by current portals; use ui_queries.
nameNoNew display name.
tagsNoTag list — replaces existing tags, unless merge_tags:true (then these are added).
typeNoBlock type. This server only handles HTML blocks, so it must be "html".html
accessNoNew access control object.
dry_runNoRun every gate and report the would-be write without updating.
block_idYesBlock UUID to update.
css_fileNoPath to a file holding the block's CSS; the server reads it into `css`. Same byte-exact guarantee and same root containment as html_file. Mutually exclusive with `css`.
html_fileNoPath to a file holding the block's HTML+JS; the server reads it into json_data.html. PREFER THIS over inlining large content: the bytes are read off disk byte-exact, so nothing is retyped and characters like em dashes or box-drawing cannot silently normalize. Mutually exclusive with json_data.html. Must resolve under the CWD, the VC dir, or a PORTAL_FILE_ROOTS entry.
json_dataNoNew widget/extra config.
merge_tagsNoMerge `tags` into the block's existing tags instead of replacing them — preserves functional tags (e.g. a nav 'Menu' tag). Default false.
ui_queriesNoReplacement query/datasource binding. Omit to keep the block's existing binding (it is preserved automatically); pass [] to explicitly unbind all queries.
expected_updated_atNoOptimistic-concurrency token: the block's updated_at from your read. Refuses with a conflict if the block changed in between — re-read, re-apply, retry.
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already indicate mutation (readOnlyHint=false) and non-destructive nature (destructiveHint=false). The description adds valuable details beyond annotations: server-side field merging, delta-only validation with grandfathering of existing violations, and dry_run preview behavior. It does not mention error handling, authentication, or rate limits, but what it adds is meaningful and non-redundant.

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?

The description is two sentences, front-loaded with the core action and followed by key behavioral highlights. It is efficiently structured with no fluff, covering merge semantics, validation behavior, and dry_run in a compact form. Every sentence earns its place.

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?

Given the tool's complexity (14 parameters, nested objects) and lack of an output schema, the description covers the main behavioral aspects (merge, delta validation, dry_run) and points to the schema for parameter details. It does not mention the return value or error behavior, but the absence of an output schema makes it acceptable to rely on the schema for parameters. Overall, it is sufficiently complete for an agent to use it correctly.

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?

The schema description coverage is 100%, and each parameter is already well-documented (e.g., ui_queries, dry_run, merge_tags, html_file). The description summarizes overall behavior (merge, delta validation) but does not add per-parameter meaning beyond the schema. It also clarifies the omission semantics of ui_queries, but that is already present in the schema. Therefore, it meets the baseline of 3 but does not exceed it.

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 states a specific action ('Update an existing HTML block by UUID') with a clear resource and identifier. It distinguishes itself from sibling create_block (which creates) and generic update_resource by targeting HTML blocks and using UUIDs. This is precise and unambiguous.

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?

The description provides clear context for use: updating an existing HTML block via UUID, with merge semantics and a dry_run option. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or when to choose this over other update/create tools, so it lacks explicit exclusion guidance but still offers strong contextual cues.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/zuarbase/Zuar-Portal-MCP-Public'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server