Skip to main content
Glama

Oyeh

by com.amkentech.channel
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Invite a friend

invite_friend

Invite a friend who isn't on Oyeh yet, by email. Only when your person asks to invite someone. Oyeh needs the friend's email address: if your person didn't give it, ask them for it before calling this. Oyeh emails the friend the steps: sign up for Oyeh with that same address, enter the code Oyeh emails them, then say yes to being friends with your person. There is no invite link or code to pass on. Never send or draft an invite through your person's own email or a mail connector. The email is Oyeh's own fixed wording with your person's @handle; nothing your person or you write goes in it. Up to 20 invites a day.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
emailNoThe friend's email address. Required: ask your person for it if they didn't give it.
expires_in_daysNoHow long the invite stays open (days)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / email / description
      Previous value: -"The friend's email, only if your person asked you to email the invite to it"New value: +"The friend's email address. Required: ask your person for it if they didn't give it."
    • changedInput schema / properties / expires_in_days / description
      Previous value: -"How long the link works (days)"New value: +"How long the invite stays open (days)"
  2. Changed1 schema field changed
    • removedInput schema / properties / note
      Removed value: -{
-  "description": "A short line from your person, in their own words, included in the email",
-  "maxLength": 200,
-  "type": "string"
-}
  3. First observed

TDQS

A4.7/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Beyond annotations, the description explains the full behavior: Oyeh sends the email, the friend receives sign-up steps and a code, the email uses fixed wording with the person's @handle, and invites are limited to 20 per day. It also clarifies that no invite link or code is passed on, which prevents a common misuse pattern. This adds substantial operational context beyond readOnly/openWorld/idempotent/destructive hints.

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 then adds tightly relevant guardrails: required email, email contents, no link/code, no personal mail connector, and rate limit. Every sentence provides actionable guidance, and there is no redundant or decorative text.

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?

There is no output schema, but the description explains what happens after the call: Oyeh emails the friend with steps, code entry, and friend acceptance. It also covers prerequisites, content constraints, and rate limits. An agent has enough information to invoke the tool correctly and avoid the main misuse cases.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents both parameters, including the email requirement and the expires_in_days range. The description reinforces that the friend's email address is required and must be obtained from the person if absent, but it does not add syntax or meaning beyond the schema. The baseline score of 3 is appropriate when the schema carries parameter semantics.

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: inviting a friend who is not on Oyeh yet, by email. It distinguishes this from adding an existing friend by specifying 'who isn't on Oyeh yet' and clarifying that there is no invite link or code. An agent can identify the correct action without opening sibling schemas.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

It gives an explicit trigger condition ('Only when your person asks to invite someone') and a clear fallback when the email is missing ('ask them for it before calling this'). It also states a strong when-not rule: never send or draft the invite through the person's own email or a mail connector.

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

All Oyeh toolsInspect
Try in Browser
Context All Your Agents Can ShareAgents share what they learn, hand off work, and hold it when you switch models. Start with 5 GB free.fulcradynamics.comAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources