Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Ankra

by ai.ankra
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Create project

create_project

Create a project in the organisation (the twin of ankra project create). Needs projects.manage. A project is a room inside the organisation (ADR 0022): it starts empty, and move_cluster_to_project and move_application_to_project fill it. The slug is permanent (it is in kubeconfig entries, CLI configuration and links): lowercase kebab-case, at most 63 characters, not a UUID, and 'default' is reserved. Refused when a project with the slug already exists or projects are not enabled for the organisation.

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": {
      "name": "<name>",
      "slug": "<slug>"
    },
    "name": "create_project"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameYesDisplay name, at most 128 characters.
slugYesPermanent identifier: lowercase a-z, 0-9 and hyphens, at most 63 characters.
descriptionNoOptional description, at most 2048 characters.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Added

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations only declare readOnlyHint=false, idempotentHint=false and destructiveHint=false; the description adds the real behavioral payload: the required permission scope, that creation is refused rather than silently deduped on slug collision, that the project starts empty, and that the slug is immutable because it leaks into kubeconfig, CLI config and links. That is exactly the context an agent cannot infer from structured fields.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Front-loaded with purpose and permissions, then constraints, then failure modes — a sensible order with almost no filler. The parenthetical ADR citation and the CLI-equivalence note are mildly incidental but arguably aid recognition.

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?

For a simple three-parameter creation tool with no output schema, the description covers preconditions, input constraints, and failure modes thoroughly. The only gap is that it does not say what is returned (e.g., the created project object or its identifier), which an agent may need for chaining move_* calls.

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

Parameters4/5

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

Schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3, but the description goes beyond the schema for the most consequential parameter: 'slug' is permanent, must not be a UUID, and 'default' is reserved — none of which appear in the schema description. It adds no guidance on 'name' or 'description', so not a 5.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Create a project in the organisation') and immediately situates it against siblings: it names move_cluster_to_project and move_application_to_project as the tools that populate the project, and the permanence note implicitly separates it from rename_project. An agent can identify it without opening the schema.

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?

Gives the precondition ('Needs projects.manage') and the refusal conditions (duplicate slug, projects not enabled for the organisation), plus routes the agent to move_* tools for follow-up work. It never explicitly states when *not* to use it versus delete_project/rename_project, which keeps it just short of a 5.

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

All Ankra toolsInspect
Try in Browser
One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources