Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Kangram

by app.kangram
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Respond to invitation

respond_to_invitation

Use this command to accept or reject a pending board invitation by its token (from list_pending_invitations).

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": {
      "token": "<token>",
      "accept": "<accept>"
    },
    "name": "respond_to_invitation"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
tokenYesInvitation token (the unguessable bearer string from list_pending_invitations).
acceptYesTrue to accept, false to reject.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed3 schema fields changed
    • removedInput schema / properties / invitation_id
      Removed value: -{
-  "description": "Invitation ID to respond to.",
-  "exclusiveMinimum": 0,
-  "maximum": 9007199254740991,
-  "type": "integer"
-}
    • addedInput schema / properties / token
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Invitation token (the unguessable bearer string from list_pending_invitations).",
+  "maxLength": 200,
+  "minLength": 1,
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • changedInput schema / required
      Previous value: -[
-  "invitation_id",
-  "accept"
-]New value: +[
+  "token",
+  "accept"
+]
  2. First observed

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

The annotations already declare that the tool is non-read-only, non-idempotent, non-destructive, and closed-world. The description adds the pending-invitation state and token source, but it does not explain what accepting or rejecting does to board membership, whether the token is consumed, or what happens with an expired token.

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 a single well-structured sentence with the action and prerequisite front-loaded. Every clause carries useful selection or invocation information.

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 two-parameter mutation with annotations and no output schema, the description covers the essential selection and token-source information. It is slightly incomplete on the downstream effects of accepting or rejecting, but the core invocation context is present.

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

Parameters3/5

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

Schema coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents both parameters. The description restates that the token comes from list_pending_invitations and that the action is accept/reject, but it adds no format or semantic details beyond 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 verb and resource: accept or reject a pending board invitation. It also scopes the action to a token obtained from list_pending_invitations, which distinguishes it clearly from sibling tools such as list_pending_invitations and cancel_board_invitation.

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?

It explicitly says when to use the tool: handling a pending board invitation, with the token coming from list_pending_invitations. It does not discuss exclusions or alternatives, but the operational context is clear.

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

All Kangram 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