Skip to main content
Glama

独行录 / opcmenu

点名邀请进组织

invite_organization_members

【需要登录·OWNER/ADMIN】点名邀请站内用户加入组织,对方会立刻收到推送,接受即入会(免审)。一次最多 30 人。 【组合链】search_organization_invite_candidates 拿 userId → 把名单和附言念给用户确认 → 本工具 → list_organization_member_invites 看谁接了。 【口径/坑】① 已是成员、已有待回应邀请、30 天内拒过、被移出过、拉黑关系、未装 App 的云用户会进 skipped(带原因),不是失败。② message 是对方会看到的原文(≤200 字),发起前念给用户。③ 每个组织每天最多手动邀 200 人。

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
messageNo附言(对方在推送与邀请横幅里看到的原文),可选
userIdsYes被邀请人的 userId,一次最多 30
organizationIdYes组织 id

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Added

TDQS

A4.9/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly=false, openWorld=true, idempotent=false, destructive=false, but the description adds substantial context: permission requirements, immediate recipient push, auto-accept/no-review behavior, 30-per-call and 200-per-day limits, and skipped reasons. This is rich behavioral disclosure beyond annotations with no contradictions.

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?

Bracketed sections front-load purpose, permission, side effect, then chain, then caveats. It is dense but every sentence carries operational detail for a complex mutation; there is no filler.

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 non-idempotent, open-world mutation with no output schema, the description covers prerequisites, side effects, daily caps, skipped-invite semantics, and follow-up verification. Nothing material for correct invocation is missing.

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 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds that userIds should be obtained via search_organization_invite_candidates and that the message is recipient-facing text to confirm with the user before sending, giving extra operational meaning beyond the schema field descriptions.

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?

States a specific verb+resource: inviting named in-app users into an organization, with permission level and the immediate push/auto-join effect. It names sibling tools in the combination chain, so an agent can distinguish it from search_organization_invite_candidates and list_organization_member_invites.

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?

Gives an explicit combination chain: use search_organization_invite_candidates to get userIds, confirm message with the user, call this tool, then use list_organization_member_invites to check acceptance. It also states login/OWNER/ADMIN prerequisites and clarifies that skipped invitees are not failures.

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