Synento

Create project

create_project

Create a project in the organisation. The new project is added to this connection, so the other tools can use it. (Requires scope projects:create.)

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_project"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`name`	Yes
`environment`	No
`idempotency_key`	No	Retrying with the same key returns the original result instead of creating another.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedOct 20, 2026

TDQS

A3.5/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations cover the write/read and destructive profile, but the description adds genuinely new behavioral information: the required scope 'projects:create' (an auth prerequisite) and the side effect that the project is attached to the current connection and becomes visible to other tools. It does not address duplicate handling or what happens on retry, which the schema covers via idempotency_key.

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?

Two short sentences, front-loaded with the action and followed by the most decision-relevant consequence. No filler or redundancy.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a 3-parameter mutation tool with no output schema, the description leaves meaningful gaps: it never says what is returned (project object? identifier?), and the 'environment' parameter is undocumented in both schema and description. The auth scope note is helpful, but overall it is only adequate.

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

Parameters2/5

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

Schema description coverage is only 33% — only idempotency_key is documented in the schema. The description mentions none of the parameters: neither 'name' (the sole required field, with length bounds) nor 'environment' (an enum of dev/staging/prod) is explained, so it adds no meaning over what the schema already provides.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb and resource ('Create a project in the organisation') and adds the scoping fact that the project is bound to the current connection. It doesn't explicitly name list_projects or other siblings as alternatives, so it falls short of full sibling differentiation.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

Usage is only implied: 'The new project is added to this connection, so the other tools can use it' hints that this is a prerequisite step before other tools. There is no explicit when-to-use/when-not-to-use guidance, no mention of preconditions such as needing an existing connection, and no named alternative.

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

All Synento 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?