CoachingPortal by Cotlet

Invite coach in CoachingPortal

coachingportal_invite_coach

Read-onlyIdempotent

Invite coach in the user's own CoachingPortal account from ChatGPT, Claude or any AI agent. Returns how to do it in CoachingPortal step by step (screens, buttons, fields) and opens nothing by itself; then do it with the cotlet_browser_* tools in the user's CoachingPortal Cloud Browser. CoachingPortal's official API: CoachingPortal publishes no public API.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "coachingportal_invite_coach"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedNov 11, 2026

TDQS

A4.1/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the description's main added value is clarifying that despite the "invite" name the tool performs no mutation and only returns procedural guidance, plus the note that no public API exists. It still does not describe the shape or length of the returned steps, or whether the guidance is personalized to the user's account state.

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 sentences, front-loaded with the action, then the return behavior, then the handoff to browser tools. Minor awkwardness in wording such as "opens nothing by itself," but no filler sentences.

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?

For a parameterless, non-mutating tool with no output schema, the description covers purpose, return content (screens, buttons, fields), side effects (none), and the required follow-up tooling. Nothing an agent needs in order to call it correctly is missing.

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?

The tool takes zero parameters and the schema coverage is 100%, so there is nothing for the description to disambiguate. Baseline 4 applies; the description sensibly avoids inventing parameter detail.

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?

The description gives a specific verb and resource (invite a coach) and scopes it to "the user's own CoachingPortal account," which implicitly separates it from client-facing siblings. It never explicitly names an alternative such as coachingportal_manage_coach_invitation, so an agent must infer the boundary from scope alone.

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?

It clearly states what happens (returns step-by-step instructions) and what does not happen ("opens nothing by itself"), then hands off to the cotlet_browser_* tools as the execution path. That is strong context, but there is no explicit when-not guidance or prerequisite check before calling.

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

All CoachingPortal by Cotlet 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?