Morpha

Move project to workspace

move_project_to_workspace

Destructive

Move a project into a workspace, or back to the caller's personal space. Pass workspaceId (from list_workspaces) to place the project in that workspace — every member then sees it, with their workspace role deciding edit vs view. Pass workspaceId: null to detach it back to personal. Requires an edit-capable role (owner/admin/editor) in the TARGET workspace and write access to the project. Switching a project from one workspace to another cleanly drops the old membership.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`projectId`	Yes	Id of the project to move.
`workspaceId`	Yes	Target workspace id (from list_workspaces), or null to move the project back to the caller's personal space.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`ok`	Yes	Whether the call succeeded.
`data`	No	The payload, shaped by the tool.
`note`	No	What to do next when not ready.
`error`	No	Why it failed.
`status`	No	For cache-backed readers: whether the answer was ready.
`editorUrl`	No	Opens this project in the editor.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed2 schema fields changedSep 17, 2026

removedInput schema / properties / anonymousToken

Removed value: -{
-  "description": "The token create_anonymous_account returned. This connection has no Morpha key, so every call carries it.",
-  "type": "string"
-}

changedInput schema / required

Previous value: -[
-  "projectId",
-  "workspaceId",
-  "anonymousToken"
-]New value: +[
+  "projectId",
+  "workspaceId"
+]

Changed1 schema field changedSep 15, 2026

changedOutput schema / (root)

Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "description": "The result envelope every Morpha tool returns.",
+  "properties": {
+    "data": {
+      "description": "The payload, shaped by the tool.",
+      "type": [
+        "object",
+        "array",
+        "string",
+        "number",
+        "boolean",
+        "null"
+      ]
+    },
+    "editorUrl": {
+      "description": "Opens this project in the editor.",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "error": {
+      "description": "Why it failed.",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "note": {
+      "description": "What to do next when not ready.",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "ok": {
+      "description": "Whether the call succeeded.",
+      "type": "boolean"
+    },
+    "status": {
+      "description": "For cache-backed readers: whether the answer was ready.",
+      "enum": [
+        "ready",
+        "not-ready"
+      ],
+      "type": "string"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "ok"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}

Changed2 schema fields changedSep 11, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / anonymousToken

Added value: +{
+  "description": "The token create_anonymous_account returned. This connection has no Morpha key, so every call carries it.",
+  "type": "string"
+}

changedInput schema / required

Previous value: -[
-  "projectId",
-  "workspaceId"
-]New value: +[
+  "projectId",
+  "workspaceId",
+  "anonymousToken"
+]

First observedSep 7, 2026

TDQS

A4.5/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, and the description does not contradict this; it adds valuable behavioral detail: visibility to all members with role-based edit/view, and the clean dropping of old membership when switching workspaces. It also discloses permission requirements. This goes beyond the annotation's generic destructive flag, providing concrete consequences.

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 front-loaded with the core action and immediately covers both usage modes. Every sentence adds essential information—permissions, side effects, and parameter guidance—with no filler or repetition. It is concise yet complete for a tool of this complexity.

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 destructive mutation with an output schema, the description covers all essential aspects: the action, the two distinct use cases, required permissions, membership behavior, and the source of the workspace ID. An agent has everything needed to call the tool correctly and anticipate its effects, without needing to open the schema or guess return behavior.

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 both parameters are documented. The description adds extra semantics beyond the schema: it specifies that workspaceId should come from list_workspaces, explains the null case for returning to personal space, and clarifies the effect of each mode. This enrichment justifies a score above the baseline of 3.

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 clearly states the action (move a project) with a specific verb and resource, and explicitly covers both modes: into a workspace or back to personal space. It distinguishes itself from siblings like move_band and move_layer by focusing on project-to-workspace movement, making selection 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 when to use it: to place a project in a workspace (with workspaceId from list_workspaces) or detach it back to personal (with null). It also states prerequisites (edit-capable role in target workspace, write access to project) and notes the effect on membership. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the conditions are sufficiently clear for an agent to decide.

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

All Morpha 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?