Skip to main content
Glama

Mencoro

Cancel an invitation

cancel_invitation
Destructive

Cancel a pending invitation; its link stops working. Find ids with list_members and includeInvitations. Requires a confirmationToken: call preview_operation with tool "cancel_invitation" and these arguments first, show the returned plan to the user, and call this tool only after the user explicitly agrees. Needs the organization:manage permission and the owner role.

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": {
      "organizationId": "<organizationId>",
      "invitationId": "<invitationId>",
      "confirmationToken": "<confirmationToken>"
    },
    "name": "cancel_invitation"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
requestIdNoOptional idempotency key, 8-255 printable characters. Reuse it only to retry this same call.
invitationIdYes
organizationIdYes
confirmationTokenYes

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYes
roleYes
emailYes
stateYes
createdAtYes
expiresAtYes
acceptedAtNo
projectIdsYesThe projects a selected access reaches, limited to those still in the organization; empty when the mode is all. It may be empty on selected once its projects left the organization, which grants nothing
projectAccessModeYesWhich projects of the organization the invitee reaches on accepting: every project, or only projectIds

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed3 schema fields changed
    • addedOutput schema / properties / projectAccessMode
      Added value: +{
      +  "description": "Which projects of the organization the invitee reaches on accepting: every project, or only projectIds",
      +  "enum": [
      +    "all",
      +    "selected"
      +  ],
      +  "type": "string"
      +}
    • addedOutput schema / properties / projectIds
      Added value: +{
      +  "description": "The projects a selected access reaches, limited to those still in the organization; empty when the mode is all. It may be empty on selected once its projects left the organization, which grants nothing",
      +  "items": {
      +    "format": "uuid",
      +    "type": "string"
      +  },
      +  "type": "array"
      +}
    • changedOutput schema / required
      Previous value: -[
      -  "id",
      -  "email",
      -  "role",
      -  "state",
      -  "createdAt",
      -  "expiresAt"
      -]New value: +[
      +  "id",
      +  "email",
      +  "role",
      +  "state",
      +  "createdAt",
      +  "expiresAt",
      +  "projectAccessMode",
      +  "projectIds"
      +]
  2. Added

TDQS

A4.8/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations declare destructiveHint=true, readOnlyHint=false, and idempotentHint=false, and the description goes beyond them by naming the real-world effect ('its link stops working'), the required privilege level, and the human-in-the-loop confirmation protocol. That is the context an agent needs before performing an irreversible cancellation.

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?

Three dense sentences, front-loaded with the effect and then the prerequisites, with no filler. It is slightly compressed into one long procedural sentence, but every clause carries operational value.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained. Given a destructive, permission-gated mutation with a required confirmation token, the description covers the effect, the id source, the confirmation flow, and the authorization requirements.

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 only 25%, with invitationId and organizationId having no schema descriptions. The description compensates by explaining where invitationId comes from (list_members with includeInvitations) and how confirmationToken is obtained (preview_operation), though it does not explicitly describe organizationId or restate the idempotency-key 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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Cancel a pending invitation') plus the concrete consequence ('its link stops working'). This distinguishes it cleanly from sibling tools such as invite_member, list_members, and remove_tracked_queries_from_clusters.

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?

Gives explicit routing for finding ids ('Find ids with list_members and includeInvitations') and a mandatory confirmation workflow through preview_operation with a user-agreement gate. It also states the required permission ('organization:manage') and role ('owner'), which defines when the call will even succeed.

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

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.