Veynod

Create Child Tenant

create_child_tenant

Create a node under a parent. People (owners/admins) only: agent tokens get 403.

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": {
      "parent": "<parent>",
      "display_name": "<display_name>"
    },
    "name": "create_child_tenant"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`alias`	No
`parent`	Yes
`tenant_type`	No		organization
`display_name`	Yes
`idempotency_key`	No	Optional. Retries with the same key and arguments within 24 h replay the first result (replayed=true) without a second write; a different body with the same key is idempotency_key_reused.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedNov 3, 2026

TDQS

B3.4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations only declare readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false, so the description's authorization disclosure (people-only, agent tokens receive 403) is a genuinely additive behavioral fact an agent cannot get from structured fields. It stops short of saying what the new tenant inherits from the parent or whether the operation is reversible, but the auth constraint is the highest-value missing piece and it is covered.

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?

Two short sentences, front-loaded with the core action and followed by the access constraint. There is no filler, though the second sentence reads like a warning fragment rather than a structured note.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

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 need not be explained, and the auth caveat plus the parent-child framing cover the essentials for calling it. What remains missing is parameter-level guidance and inheritance behavior for a mutation tool with five inputs, which keeps this at minimum-viable rather than complete.

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

Parameters2/5

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

Schema description coverage is only 20% — only idempotency_key is documented in the schema. The description adds no meaning for parent, display_name, alias, or tenant_type; it never says what form a parent reference takes or what choosing organization vs personal implies. With five parameters and low coverage, this is a clear compensation gap.

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?

"Create a node under a parent" gives a specific verb and the parent-child relationship, and the tool name clarifies the resource is a child tenant. The word "node" is slightly inconsistent with "tenant" terminology used by siblings like attach_tenant and get_tenant_tree, but an agent can still tell this is a creation tool for hierarchical tenants.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

It states a caller constraint (owners/admins only; agent tokens get 403), which is real usage guidance. However, it never says when to prefer this over adjacent siblings such as create_group, attach_tenant, or move_tenant, so alternative selection is left to inference.

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

All Veynod 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.