Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Gemmein

by com.gemmein
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Ask to lift a customer's suspension

request_unsuspend_person

Asks the founder to lift one Live customer's suspension: they can sign in again, nothing else changes. test_member_unsuspend does the same for a test member in Development, at once. This is a change to one customer, so it is your human's approval alone: they approve it in their browser, and no emailed code is asked. Nothing changes until they approve; approving it carries it out — Gemmein does it the moment they press Approve, once, and records what happened on their Logs. The approval page shows Gemmein's own sentence of the real effect, read against Live; a request that no longer matches Live when it is carried out is refused and nothing changes. Returns the approval link for your human and a handle: live_action_status with wait: true answers the moment it is done, or why not — never ask your human to tell you they approved. A second call asks again (a new approval).

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": {
      "person": "<person>"
    },
    "name": "request_unsuspend_person"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
noteNoone sentence for your human, shown under Gemmein's own summary
personYesthe Live customer: their email address or id (usr_…) — live_people lists them

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Added

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Beyond annotations, the description details the approval workflow: nothing changes until approval, Gemmein executes automatically upon approval, records to Logs, the approval page shows the real effect read against Live, and a stale request is refused. It also explains how to check status via live_action_status and that a second call creates a new approval. This is rich behavioral context that annotations alone do not provide.

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?

The description is informative and generally front-loaded, starting with purpose and the alternative. However, it is somewhat long and includes some redundancy (e.g., repeating that nothing changes until approval, and explaining the approval process in multiple sentences). It could be tightened without losing meaning, but it remains well-structured and readable.

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 mutation-request tool with no output schema, the description covers all essential aspects: what the tool does, how approval works, what it returns (approval link and handle), how to check status, and the conditions under which the request may be refused. An agent has enough information to invoke it correctly and follow up.

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?

The schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents both parameters (person and note) clearly. The description adds little about parameter semantics beyond what is in the schema, aside from implying the person is the Live customer to unsuspend. Baseline 3 is appropriate when the schema does the heavy lifting.

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: 'Asks the founder to lift one Live customer's suspension', and immediately clarifies the effect ('they can sign in again, nothing else changes'). It also distinguishes from the sibling tool test_member_unsuspend by specifying the environment (Live vs Development) and immediacy.

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?

The description explicitly names the alternative test_member_unsuspend and the condition under which it applies (test member in Development, at once). It also makes clear that this tool is for a Live customer and requires human approval, leaving no ambiguity about when to use it.

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

All Gemmein toolsInspect
Try in Browser
Claude Code, inside the Godot 4 editorFlockbay puts an AI agent in the real Godot 4 editor: it writes GDScript, runs your game and fixes what breaks. Free, or bring your own Claude Code or Codex.flockbay.comAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources