MCP for Claude & ChatGPT

Manage projects

tuqui_project

Destructive

Create, read, update, share or delete the projects you are a member of. action='list' returns yours; 'get' one in full, including who it is shared with; 'save' creates when 'project_id' is absent and updates when present; 'share' puts somebody in the project or takes them out; 'delete' removes one. Editing or deleting takes the 'admin' role IN THAT PROJECT, which is not the same as being a workspace admin. A project's knowledge base (files and Drive folders) is managed with tuqui_kb.

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": {
      "action": "<action>"
    },
    "name": "tuqui_project"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`to`	No	share, target='user': who to give it to — their EMAIL or name (a user id also works). They must already be a member of this workspace: sharing does not invite. target='group': the group's name. A list, so handing the same level to a team is one call.
`name`	No	Human name. Required to create.
`level`	No	share: 'usar' or 'editar' — the two levels of the picker, Spanish because the spec fixes them as the domain vocabulary of the model (compartir-unificado §10). 'none' takes the access away: it revokes the person's share, or closes the object back to the people invited. 'link' is a reach only the Library offers (anyone in the workspace with the URL).
`action`	Yes	REQUIRED. What to do with the projects. 'share' adds or removes members — it replaces the old 'link' / 'unlink'.
`target`	No	share: who gets it. 'user' (default) gives it to people; 'group' to whoever is in a group; 'workspace' moves the reach, handing the level to every member at once.
`project_id`	No	UUID. Required for 'get' and 'delete'; on 'save' it means update.
`description`	No	One line: what this project is about.
`consent_token`	No	The approval a person gave for THIS call in Tuqui. Bound to these arguments and valid once.
`system_prompt_addon`	No	Extra instructions every chat in this project carries.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedNov 2, 2026

TDQS

A4.6/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations only say readOnly=false, destructive=true, openWorld=false; the description goes well beyond by disclosing the permissions required per action, that sharing does NOT invite (target must already be a workspace member), and that 'none' revokes access. It also explains that a destructive tool also carries read actions ('list'/'get'), which reconciles the destructiveHint with the multi-action surface rather than contradicting it.

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?

Front-loaded with the capability sentence, then one clause per action, then the permission caveat, then the sibling boundary. Dense but every sentence carries distinct information — no restatement of the title or the enum values verbatim.

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?

For a 9-parameter, destructive, multi-action tool with no output schema, it covers permissions, side effects of revocation, and action routing well. Gaps are minor: it only gestures at return shape ('get' one in full, including who it is shared with) and says nothing about what 'list' yields or about irreversibility of delete.

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 100%, so baseline would be 3, but the description adds genuine cross-parameter logic the schema does not state: on 'save', the presence or absence of project_id decides create versus update, and 'share' is the single action that both grants and removes. It does not cover 'to', 'level' or 'target' semantics in prose, but those are enumerated in the schema.

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 set and resource ('Create, read, update, share or delete the projects') and then disambiguates every action value ('list' returns yours, 'get' one in full, 'save' creates vs updates, 'share' adds/removes, 'delete' removes one). It also names a sibling and draws a boundary: knowledge base files and Drive folders belong to tuqui_kb, not here.

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?

Gives clear operating context: the 'admin' role IN THAT PROJECT is required to edit or delete, explicitly 'not the same as being a workspace admin', and routes KB work to tuqui_kb. What's missing is any exclusions against the other governance siblings (tuqui_group, tuqui_member) — the agent must infer on its own that groups are not projects.

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

All MCP for Claude & ChatGPT 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.