Fast.io

member

Destructive

Workspace/share member management: list, add, remove, update, transfer ownership, join, leave. Call action='describe' for the full action/param reference. Destructive: remove.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`role`	No	Share permission level.
`limit`	No	Maximum number of items to return (1-500, default 100)
`action`	Yes	Operation. Use 'describe' for full action reference.
`offset`	No	Number of items to skip (default 0)
`expires`	No	Membership expiration — `YYYY-MM-DD HH:MM:SS UTC` for BOTH workspace and share. ISO 8601 is NOT accepted (406).
`message`	No	Invitation email message (10-255 chars).
`user_id`	No	User profile ID (share).
`entity_id`	No	Workspace or share ID (19-digit numeric or custom name). Must match entity_type.
`member_id`	No	Member ID (workspace).
`expiration`	No	Alias for expires (share only).
`entity_type`	No	Workspace or share.
`permissions`	No	Workspace permission level.
`display_limit`	No	How many members to return for the list action. Default 10, max 500. The MCP trims post-fetch; backend paging stays MCP-internal so the platform cache stays warm.
`notifications`	No	Notification preference (workspace string).
`invitation_key`	No	Invitation key string.
`notify_options`	No	Notification preference (share).
`email_or_user_id`	No	Email (to invite) or user ID (to add directly).
`invitation_action`	No	Accept or decline.
`force_notification`	No	Force notify existing user (workspace-only).
`invitation_expires`	No	Invitation expiration ISO 8601 (workspace-only).

TDQS

A4.2/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=true. The description goes beyond this by identifying 'remove' as the destructive action and by disclosing the self-describing action='describe' behavior. This adds specific context without contradicting annotations.

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?

The description is three short sentences: purpose with operations, the 'describe' instruction, and a destructive warning. Every sentence earns its place with no redundancy or filler.

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?

Given the tool's complexity (10 actions, 20 parameters, no output schema), the description provides a concise overview and leverages the built-in 'describe' action for full detail. It doesn't outline return values, but that's acceptable without an output schema. It is sufficient for orientation.

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

Parameters3/5

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

Schema description coverage is 100%, meaning all 20 parameters have descriptions. The description text itself adds no parameter-level detail beyond pointing to action='describe' for more information, so it meets the baseline for fully-covered schemas.

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?

The description clearly specifies 'Workspace/share member management' and enumerates the operations: list, add, remove, update, transfer ownership, join, leave. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like share (managing shares) and workspace (workspace settings).

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 provides clear context for when to use the tool (member management for workspace/share) and instructs to call action='describe' for the full action/param reference. It does not explicitly contrast with sibling tools or state exclusions, but the resource scope is unambiguous.

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

All Fast.io tools Inspect

Try in Browser

RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A4.1/5.0

Disambiguation5/5

Each tool covers a clearly distinct domain (auth, storage, shares, comments, events, AI, etc.), and overlapping concepts like share vs. fileshare are explicitly disambiguated with deprecation notes and cross-references. An agent can reliably select the correct tool for a task without ambiguity.

Naming Consistency3/5

Tool names are all lowercase single words, but they mix nouns (user, org, workspace) with verbs (download, find, upload) and include a hyphenated 'how-to'. There is no consistent verb_noun or noun-only pattern, though the names are still readable and memorable.

Tool Count4/5

19 tools is slightly above the typical 3-15 sweet spot, but the platform's breadth (auth, file management, sharing, collaboration, AI, metadata, and help) justifies this count. Each tool represents a substantial domain area, so none feel redundant.

Completeness5/5

The toolset provides full lifecycle coverage for the platform: authentication, user/org/workspace management, file storage/upload/download/search, sharing (both quickshare and durable file shares), comments, events, metadata pipelines, AI assistance, and product help. No obvious dead ends or missing operations are apparent.

Resources

Need Help?