Skip to main content
Glama

Remove workspace member

workspace_member_remove
DestructiveIdempotent

Remove a member or invite: member is the row id from workspace_member_list (it stands alone), or an account id, alias or email address with workspaceId. Access ends immediately; task holds and browser views are reconciled. In a workspace, someone with no row there (the owner or a team member included) is a no-op; an alias or account id that names no account is UNAVAILABLE. Anyone who may share here (editors, guests included).

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": {
      "member": "<member>"
    },
    "name": "workspace_member_remove"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
whyNoRequired for workspace items: one sentence on what the person is trying to accomplish, in their terms, not a description of this edit. Every workspace write takes one; sessions and summaries record themselves from it. At most 300 characters.
memberYesThe member: its row id (id from the member list; it stands alone), or an account id, alias or email address with workspaceId (the person's primary-account row, or the row an add or invite by the address made).
workspaceIdNoThe workspace (its id or its slug), when member is an account id, alias or email; optional beside a row id (the row must be in it).

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
okYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed5 schema fields changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / workspaceId / description
      Previous value: -"The workspace, when member is an account id, alias or email; optional beside a row id (the row must be in it)."New value: +"The workspace (its id or its slug), when member is an account id, alias or email; optional beside a row id (the row must be in it)."
    • removedInput schema / properties / workspaceId / format
      Removed value: -"uuid"
    • addedInput schema / properties / workspaceId / maxLength
      Added value: +64
    • addedInput schema / properties / workspaceId / minLength
      Added value: +1
    • removedInput schema / properties / workspaceId / pattern
      Removed value: -"^([0-9a-fA-F]{8}-[0-9a-fA-F]{4}-[1-8][0-9a-fA-F]{3}-[89abAB][0-9a-fA-F]{3}-[0-9a-fA-F]{12}|00000000-0000-0000-0000-000000000000|ffffffff-ffff-ffff-ffff-ffffffffffff)$"
  2. First observed

TDQS

A3.9/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare destructive=true, idempotent=true, readOnly=false, so the safety profile is known. The description adds real substance beyond that: access ends immediately, task holds and browser views are reconciled, and certain targets are silent no-ops rather than errors. It stops short of stating required permissions or who may invoke it.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Everything is packed into a single dense paragraph with telegraphic fragments ('it stands alone', 'Anyone who may share here'), which slows parsing. It is size-appropriate but would benefit from separating the addressing rules from the behavior rules.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need no explanation, and the description covers addressing, immediate consequences, and failure modes for a destructive write. Missing is the relationship to the team-level removal sibling and any permission requirements for the caller.

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 description coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3, but the description adds value by tying each parameter form to an outcome — row id is self-sufficient, account/alias/email requires workspaceId, and unresolvable identifiers yield UNAVAILABLE. The trailing 'Anyone who may share here (editors, guests included)' is ambiguous about whether it describes the target set or the caller.

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 ('Remove a member or invite') and immediately clarifies the two ways to identify the target. It does not explicitly distinguish itself from the sibling team_remove_member, so an agent must infer the workspace vs team scope split.

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?

Explains the two addressing modes and their preconditions (row id stands alone; account id/alias/email needs workspaceId), plus what happens in edge cases (no-op for someone with no row, UNAVAILABLE for an unresolvable alias/account). It never names the alternative tool to use for team-level removal, which is the main guidance gap.

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.