Skip to main content
Glama

Veqen: AI cost monitoring and protection

Invite someone

invite_member

Emails an invitation to join the organization with a role (admin, member, finance or viewer). Confirm the address with the user first. Needs an owner or admin.

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": {
      "email": "<email>"
    },
    "name": "invite_member"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
roleNomember
emailYes

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Added

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations only declare the generic safety profile (not read-only, not destructive, not idempotent); the description adds the key behaviors an agent can't infer: an email is actually sent, an elevated permission (owner/admin) is required, and confirmation should happen first. It stops short of covering what happens on duplicate invitations or expiry.

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?

Three short sentences, action front-loaded, each adding information (what it does, the required values, the confirmation step, the permission gate). Nothing redundant.

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 needn't be described, and the description covers purpose, permission requirement, and role options. Remaining gaps (duplicate-invite behavior, whether the invite expires) are minor for a two-parameter tool.

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 0%, so the description has to carry the load. It does enumerate the allowed role values (admin, member, finance, viewer) and contextualizes email as the address to confirm, but says nothing about the default role being 'member' or email length bounds — the enum value is recoverable from the schema pattern anyway.

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+resource: emails an invitation to join the organization, and names the role dimension. That distinguishes it cleanly from list_members, though it doesn't explicitly reference the sibling by name.

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?

"Confirm the address with the user first" and "Needs an owner or admin" give real preconditions for use. No explicit when-not-to-use or alternative-tool routing, so not a 5.

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.

Resources