huly-mcp-selfhost

create_organization

Create a new organization or company contact in a Huly workspace by providing its name and optional city.

Instructions

Create a new organization (company contact)

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": {
      "workspace": "<workspace>",
      "name": "<name>"
    },
    "name": "create_organization"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`city`	No	City (optional)
`name`	Yes
`workspace`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv3.5.1Nov 12, 2026

TDQS

C2.6/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

Annotations only supply destructiveHint=false and a title, so the description carries most of the behavioral burden. It says nothing about required permissions, duplicate handling, whether the created record is returned, or what the workspace parameter must reference — all material for a mutation tool.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

A single front-loaded phrase with zero filler, which is good structure. However, the brevity crosses into under-specification for a create operation, so the size is not fully appropriate to the task.

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

Completeness2/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a three-parameter mutation with no output schema and thin annotations, an agent needs to know the required workspace semantics and what the call returns. The description supplies neither, leaving key gaps that structured fields do not fill.

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 coverage is 33%: only city has a description ("City (optional)"). The required name and workspace parameters are undocumented in both schema and description, and the description adds no meaning about what an organization name or workspace identifier should look like.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ("Create a new organization") and adds a clarifying gloss, "(company contact)", which tells an agent this is the company-level entity rather than a person record. It does not explicitly contrast with create_person or create_channel, but the parenthetical does real disambiguation work.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

There is no statement of when to use this tool versus create_person or update_organization, no prerequisites (e.g., that the workspace must exist), and no mention of what happens if the organization already exists. The agent must infer all routing from the name alone.

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

Deploy Server