Hook Detector

create_team

Create a team this account owns, funding its pool from your balance with credits (402 when you hold less). Members' spending comes from the pool; you keep spending your own balance. 409 already_in_team. Needs admin. Free. Same as POST /v1/team.

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": {
      "name": "<name>"
    },
    "name": "create_team"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`name`	Yes	the team's name, 1 to 80 characters
`api_key`	No
`credits`	No	credits to move from your balance into the team's pool now; 0 or left out moves none

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

AddedOct 26, 2026

TDQS

A4.1/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full load and does well: it explains pool funding from the caller's balance, the 402 insufficient-credits failure, the 409 conflict, admin requirement, and the split spending semantics between members and owner. It omits reversibility of credit movement and whether the operation is idempotent on retry.

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?

Front-loaded with the core action, then telegraphs errors and constraints with zero filler. Some fragments ('Free.', 'Needs admin.') are terse enough to be borderline cryptic, costing a point.

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?

Output schema exists, so return values need not be explained, and the description covers the operational hazards an agent needs: cost, permission, credit transfer, and the two failure codes. Missing only api_key semantics and post-creation side effects like inviting members.

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 credits parameter is enriched with the 402 error behavior beyond the schema's 'moves none' note, and name length is already covered at 67% coverage. The api_key parameter is undocumented in both schema and description, leaving a real gap in a mutation-permitting tool.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Create a team this account owns') plus the ownership/scope qualifier, which separates it from get_team and invite_to_team. The closing equivalence to POST /v1/team anchors it to a known API operation.

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 '409 already_in_team' and 'Needs admin' fragments tell the agent the two blocking preconditions, and 'Free' signals no cost barrier. It never names a sibling alternative (e.g. accept_team_invite for joining an existing team), so it falls short of the explicit when/when-not bar.

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

All Hook Detector 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?