Skip to main content
Glama

orgo_create_project

Create a new project container to organize virtual computers. Specify a unique name and optional icon to begin managing computers within the project.

Instructions

Create a new Orgo project.

Projects are containers for computers. Create a project first,
then add computers to it with orgo_create_computer.

Args:
    params (CreateProjectInput): Input parameters containing:
        - name (str): Unique name for the project (e.g., 'qa-automation')
        - icon_url (Optional[str]): URL for project icon

Returns:
    str: JSON with created project details:
        {
            "id": str,
            "name": str,
            "status": str,
            "created_at": str,
            "desktops": []
        }

Examples:
    - "Create project for QA testing" -> params with name="qa-automation"
    - "Make new project called dev-env" -> params with name="dev-env"

Error Handling:
    - Returns "Error: Conflict..." if project name already exists

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
paramsYes

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes
Behavior4/5

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

The description adds valuable behavioral context beyond what annotations provide: it explains the error handling behavior ('Returns "Error: Conflict..." if project name already exists'), which isn't covered by annotations. Annotations already indicate this is a non-destructive, non-idempotent creation operation (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=false), and the description complements this with practical error information.

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?

The description is well-structured with clear sections (Args, Returns, Examples, Error Handling) and front-loads the core purpose. While comprehensive, some sections could be more concise - the Examples section repeats information already implied by the parameter descriptions, slightly reducing efficiency.

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?

Given the tool's creation purpose, the presence of output schema, and comprehensive annotations, the description provides excellent contextual completeness. It covers purpose, workflow context, parameters, return format, examples, and error handling - everything needed for an agent to understand and use this tool effectively.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description carries the full burden of parameter documentation. It does provide parameter information in the 'Args' section, explaining the 'name' and 'icon_url' parameters with examples. However, it doesn't fully compensate for the complete lack of schema descriptions, as it doesn't mention constraints like the 100-character max length for 'name' that appears in the schema.

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 the specific action ('Create a new Orgo project') and distinguishes it from sibling tools by explaining that projects are containers for computers, with a direct reference to the complementary 'orgo_create_computer' tool. This provides clear differentiation from other tools like 'orgo_list_projects' or 'orgo_delete_project'.

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?

The description provides clear context about when to use this tool ('Create a project first, then add computers to it with orgo_create_computer'), establishing a workflow sequence. However, it doesn't explicitly state when NOT to use it or mention alternatives like checking for existing projects first, which prevents a perfect score.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/nickvasilescu/orgo-mcp'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server