Dynamoi

Get Team

dynamoi_get_team

Read-only

Read organization members and pending invitations after artist and organization settings authority checks. Artist collaboration alone never grants roster access. No invitation tokens or role mutations. Optional scope=artist reads artist collaborators only; organization is the default scope. includeHistory=true includes retained deleted, accepted and expired invitations; the default returns pending invitations.

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": {
      "artistId": "<artistId>"
    },
    "name": "dynamoi_get_team"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`scope`	No
`artistId`	Yes
`includeHistory`	No

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`code`	No
`data`	No
`kind`	No
`field`	No
`status`	Yes
`draftId`	No
`message`	No
`retryable`	No
`nextAction`	No
`failureStage`	No
`prerequisite`	No
`screeningResult`	No
`retryAfterSeconds`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed2 schema fields changedNov 5, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / includeHistory
```
Added value: +{
+  "type": "boolean"
+}
```

addedInput schema / properties / scope

Added value: +{
+  "enum": [
+    "artist",
+    "organization"
+  ],
+  "type": "string"
+}

AddedNov 2, 2026

TDQS

A4.7/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint/destructiveHint, but the description goes further by disclosing the authorization model (authority checks, collaboration being insufficient), what is deliberately excluded from the response (invitation tokens, role mutations), and the retention semantics of includeHistory. That is meaningful behavior beyond the structured hints, with only pagination/size limits left unstated.

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?

Five short sentences, dense but front-loaded with the core action first and the mode/default semantics after. Some phrasing is telegraphic ('No invitation tokens or role mutations'), but nothing is wasted and each sentence carries distinct information.

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?

With an output schema present, the description does not need to describe return values, and it correctly focuses on permissions, scope selection, and history behavior. It is nearly complete for a 3-parameter read tool; only result volume or pagination behavior is left unaddressed.

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 0%, so the description must carry parameter meaning, and it does for two of three: scope's artist-vs-organization distinction and default, and includeHistory's true-vs-default behavior including the deleted/accepted/expired retention detail. artistId is required but never characterized in the description beyond being implied by the roster context, which is the one remaining gap.

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 opens with a specific verb+resource: 'Read organization members and pending invitations', and immediately carves out the negative space ('No invitation tokens or role mutations') that separates it from the mutation sibling dynamoi_manage_team. An agent can identify the resource and the read-only scope without opening the schema.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

It states the precondition for use (artist and organization settings authority checks), an explicit anti-condition ('Artist collaboration alone never grants roster access'), and the selection rule between modes ('Optional scope=artist reads artist collaborators only; organization is the default scope'). Alternatives are effectively named via the 'no role mutations' boundary pointing at manage_team.

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

All Dynamoi 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.