Skip to main content
Glama

olark

by io.usefulapi

Update an operator

update_operator
Destructive

MUTATES Olark data: updates an existing operator. Olark API: PUT /operators/{id} (JSON). Set nickname (display name) and/or available (online/offline status); use the fields passthrough for any other documented field. NOTE: Olark uses full PUT semantics — omitting a field may reset it to its default. The path id is never sent in the body.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYesThe operator id to update (path only; required).
fieldsNoAdditional documented Olark fields to send in the JSON write body — merged OVER the typed fields above.
nicknameNoNew display name.
availableNoNew online/offline (availability) status.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4.8/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the destructiveHint annotation, the description discloses critical behavioral details: full PUT semantics where omitting a field may reset it to default, and the fact that the path id is never sent in the body. This gives the agent essential knowledge about side effects.

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 compact, front-loaded with the mutation warning, and every sentence carries necessary information. The full-PUT caveat and id-in-path note are placed effectively without clutter.

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

Completeness5/5

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

For a mutation tool with destructiveHint and full schema coverage, the description is complete enough to invoke correctly: endpoint, method, supported fields, passthrough behavior, and PUT semantics are all covered. No output schema exists, but the description adequately supports correct invocation.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters5/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Although schema coverage is 100%, the description adds meaning beyond the schema by explaining that `fields` is merged OVER the typed fields and that the id is path-only. It also clarifies the behavior of nickname and available as display name and availability status respectively, which complements the schema.

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 and resource: 'updates an existing operator' via the Olark API PUT /operators/{id}. It clearly distinguishes this from sibling tools like create_operator and get_operator by focusing on mutation of an existing entity.

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 makes clear this tool is for updating an existing operator, which implicitly separates it from create/read/group-operation siblings. It also instructs how to handle additional fields via the `fields` passthrough, but it does not explicitly state exclusions or contrast with alternatives like olark_request.

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

All olark toolsInspect
Try in Browser
RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A4.1/5.0
Disambiguation4/5

Each dedicated tool targets a distinct operator or group operation, so the core set is easy to separate. The only ambiguity is olark_request, a generic GET escape hatch that can overlap with list_operators/list_groups, but its purpose is clearly labeled as a power-user fallback.

Naming Consistency4/5

Most tools follow a clear verb_object snake_case pattern such as create_operator, list_operators, add_operator_to_group, and remove_operator_from_group. olark_request breaks the pattern slightly by being noun-style rather than verb-first, but the rest of the naming is consistent.

Tool Count5/5

Eight tools is a well-scoped count for an Olark operator and group management server. Each tool covers a distinct operation without redundant duplicates or excessive granularity.

Completeness3/5

Operator coverage includes create, get, list, and update, but there is no delete_operator, which is a notable lifecycle gap. Group management is also incomplete since it only lists groups and manages membership, with no way to create, update, or delete groups.

Resources