Dutify

pm_send_invitation

Destructive

Send an email invitation to join the current workspace. workspaceAccessLevelId is a numeric Long id (NOT a name like "admin"/"member") — fetch the catalogue from /v1/workspaces/{ws}/access-levels to translate role names to ids before calling. Caller needs MANAGE_USERS permission. Returns 201 on success. API-key scope: users:write.

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": {
      "email": "<email>",
      "workspaceAccessLevelId": "<workspaceAccessLevelId>"
    },
    "name": "pm_send_invitation"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`email`	Yes	Invitee email address
`account`	No	Multi-account auth only: name of the account from X-Dutify-Accounts to use for this call. Ignored in single-account mode (X-API-Key header). When multiple accounts are configured and this is omitted, the call fails with ACCOUNT_REQUIRED listing the available names. list_accounts never requires a selection.
`workspace`	No	Workspace identifier or exact name for this call. Overrides the configured workspace. For personal keys, discover candidates with list_workspaces and select explicitly. Does not change other calls or expand a workspace key's access.
`workspaceAccessLevelId`	Yes	Numeric access-level id (Long); list /v1/workspaces/{ws}/access-levels to discover

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedOct 24, 2026

TDQS

A4.1/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Adds meaningful context beyond annotations: an actual email is dispatched, MANAGE_USERS is required, 201 is returned on success, and the API-key scope is `users:write`. Annotations already flag destructive/openWorld/non-idempotent, so the description complements rather than repeats them; it could still warn that repeat calls re-send mail to the invitee.

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?

Three dense sentences, front-loaded with the action, then the parameter gotcha, then permissions/return/scope. No filler and no repetition of schema text.

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 mutation that triggers outbound email with no output schema, the description covers auth, id resolution, success code, and scope. Minor gap: it says 'current workspace' though a `workspace` parameter overrides it, and duplicate-invite behavior is unstated.

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 baseline would be 3, but the description adds genuine disambiguation: `workspaceAccessLevelId` is a numeric Long id and NOT a role name like "admin"/"member", plus the endpoint to translate names to ids. That is the single most likely invocation error and it is called out explicitly.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

Specific verb+resource: 'Send an email invitation to join the current workspace.' An agent can distinguish this from pm_list_invitations and pm_cancel_invitation. It does not, however, contrast it with pm_add_workspace_member / pm_add_team_member, which are the plausible alternatives for getting a user into a workspace.

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 real pre-call conditions: caller needs MANAGE_USERS permission, and the access level must be resolved via /v1/workspaces/{ws}/access-levels before calling. It stops short of stating when to prefer an invite over a direct add-member call, so it is clear context without explicit exclusions.

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

All Dutify tools Inspect

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

Need Help?