IT Onboarding Automator MCP Server
Server Configuration
Describes the environment variables required to run the server.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Instructions
Guidance the server publishes about itself, which clients place ahead of the tool catalog so the model reads it before choosing anything.
This server publishes no instructions, or was last inspected before Glama recorded them.
Capabilities
Features and capabilities supported by this server
Protocol revision2025-11-25
| Capability | Details |
|---|---|
| tools | {
"listChanged": false
} |
| prompts | {
"listChanged": false
} |
| resources | {
"subscribe": false,
"listChanged": false
} |
| experimental | {} |
Tools
Functions exposed to the LLM to take actions
| Name | Description |
|---|---|
| get_employee_accessA | Look up an employee by email address and return their profile plus the list of provisioned application grants. |
| list_failed_eventsA | List webhook events that failed provisioning. Optionally filter to events created on or after the provided ISO 8601 timestamp (since). |
| retry_provisionA | Retry provisioning for a previously failed webhook event by event_id. Reloads the stored payload and runs the hire provisioning flow again. |
Prompts
Interactive templates invoked by user choice
| Name | Description |
|---|---|
No prompts | |
Resources
Contextual data attached and managed by the client
| Name | Description |
|---|---|
No resources | |
TDQS
Scored across 3 tools
Each tool serves a distinct function: employee lookup, listing failures, and retrying provisioning. There is no ambiguity or overlap between them.
All tool names follow a consistent verb_noun pattern in snake_case: get_employee_access, list_failed_events, retry_provision. No deviations.
Three tools is slightly on the low side but adequate for the narrow domain of IT onboarding automation. The set covers lookups, monitoring, and recovery.
The tools cover access checking and failure handling, but lack creation or revocation of access. This leaves notable gaps in typical onboarding lifecycle.