Skip to main content
Glama

Hermoso

by io.github.hermoso-ai

Create a brand workspace

create_brand
Idempotent

Add a NEW brand workspace (a separate brand/client on this account) and switch to it. Each workspace has its OWN brand profile, memory, swipefile, Library, avatars, skills, playbooks and connectors — nothing leaks between them. Use this for a second brand or a new client; use draft_brand to FILL a workspace, and update_brand to edit one. Re-running with the same name returns the existing workspace instead of a duplicate. Free (the ~50-credit research cascade only starts when you then run draft_brand).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameYesthe brand / client name for the new workspace
activateNoswitch this connection to the new brand (default true) — everything you do next scopes to it

TDQS

A4.7/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

The description adds valuable context beyond annotations: it explains that the tool switches to the new workspace, that workspaces are isolated (data separation), and that it's free until draft_brand is run. It aligns with annotations (idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false) without contradiction.

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 sentences, no fluff. The main action is front-loaded, and each subsequent sentence adds distinct value (concept, usage alternatives, idempotency/cost). Efficient and well-structured.

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 2-parameter creation tool with no output schema, the description covers the conceptual model, isolation, switching behavior, idempotency, cost, and sibling differentiation. Nothing essential is missing for an agent to use it correctly.

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 coverage is 100%, so both parameters are already well-documented. The description does not add significant new semantic detail beyond the schema, though it reinforces the 'switch' behavior tied to the activate parameter. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 states a specific verb and resource: 'Add a NEW brand workspace'. It distinguishes itself from siblings by naming draft_brand and update_brand and explaining what each is for. This leaves no ambiguity about what create_brand does.

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?

Explicitly states when to use this tool ('for a second brand or a new client') and when to use alternatives ('use draft_brand to FILL a workspace, and update_brand to edit one'). Also explains behavior on re-running (idempotent) and the credit implication, providing complete guidance.

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

All Hermoso toolsInspect
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

A3.7/5.0
Disambiguation2/5

With 293 tools, the surface is enormous and many tools have overlapping purposes—multiple posting tools (post_to_meta, post_to_linkedin, schedule_post, etc.), multiple analytics tools per channel, and several search tools (search_meta_ads, search_instagram, search_reddit...). While each description is detailed, the volume makes it difficult for an agent to reliably distinguish between similar tools without careful reading, leading to frequent misselection.

Naming Consistency4/5

The naming is largely consistent with a verb_noun pattern (post_to_*, list_*, create_*, delete_*, update_*, manage_*). There are clear families for major operations. A few outliers like 'google_business_account', 'hermoso_capabilities', and 'store_get' break the pattern, but the overwhelming majority follow a predictable structure, making navigation somewhat easier.

Tool Count1/5

293 tools is far beyond any reasonable scope for a single MCP server, even for a comprehensive marketing platform. The calibration guide flags 50+ as an extreme mismatch, and this is nearly six times that threshold. Such a large surface overwhelms context windows, increases the probability of misselection, and makes it impractical for agents to learn or use effectively.

Completeness4/5

The tool set covers a vast domain: ad creation and rendering, posting across nine+ social channels, analytics and reporting, file management (Drive/OneDrive), competitor research, brand management, and more. It appears to provide CRUD and lifecycle coverage for most resources. While there may be minor gaps given the immense scope, the overall coverage is impressively comprehensive.

Resources