Update a quote's status, line items, or total. Use to progress quotes through the pipeline.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| id | Yes | Quote ID to update. Required. | |
| total | No | Updated quote total in AUD. | |
| status | No | New quote status. | |
| lineItems | No | Replacement line items array. Overwrites existing items. |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| quote | No | Updated quote with all fields |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare it's a write operation (readOnlyHint=false) and non-destructive (destructiveHint=false). The description adds no further behavioral details beyond stating it's an update.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Extremely concise: two short sentences with no redundant information. Every word is necessary.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Given the simple 4-parameter tool with an output schema, the description covers the essential purpose and usage. Could mention idempotency or prerequisite state, but not critical.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema coverage is 100%, so the description doesn't need to elaborate. It mentions the parameters (status, line items, total) but adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema already provides.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description clearly states the verb 'Update' and the resource 'quote', lists the fields that can be updated (status, line items, total), and distinguishes from siblings like quotes.create (new) and quotes.send (sending).
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
Provides clear context by indicating 'Use to progress quotes through the pipeline', implying it's used for workflow progression. However, no explicit comparison with alternatives or when-not-to-use guidance.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Most tools have distinct resource+action naming (e.g., leads.create, jobs.list), but some overlap exists in analytics tools (dashboard, detailed, financials) and workflow automations (process_lead vs google_ads_pipeline). Descriptions clarify purposes, so slight confusion is possible but limited.
All tools follow a consistent `domain.action` pattern (e.g., leads.create, billing.status). No mixing of camelCase or snake_case. Even complex names like lifecycle.assess or scaling.readiness_score adhere to the convention.
95 tools is far beyond typical well-scoped servers (3-15). While the server aims to cover an entire business management platform, this volume is overwhelming for an agent, making selection and memory difficult.
The tool surface is exceptionally comprehensive, covering formation, hiring, compliance, funding, leads, quotes, jobs, invoicing, payments, marketing, analytics, integrations, webhooks, workflows, and more. Almost no obvious gaps in the lifecycle of running a trade business.