Skip to main content
Glama
ProjectMakersDE

horizOn MCP Server

Official
by ProjectMakersDE
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

decline group invite

horizon_decline_group_invite
DestructiveIdempotent

Decline a pending group invitation using the reviewed group revision and exact requestId, removing it on both sides.

Instructions

Applies the explicit decline group invite action using the reviewed group revision. Use when: the player explicitly confirms this group action. Not for: replacing reviewed revisions/request IDs, bypassing a leader's block, or retrying automatically after uncertainty. Requires: userId and the player's session: sign in with horizon_signin_email or horizon_signin_anonymous and pass its accessToken as sessionToken. Current group revision and the exact pending requestId where applicable. Side effects: Removes your exact pending invitation on both sides. No automatic retry. Same-revision replay cannot create a second effect. Returns: {groups:MyGroupsView,group:GroupView|null}. groups is the actor's complete snapshot, never the target's private state. group is null after leave/delete; nonmembers never receive private data. Replace only the matching host/project/player cache. Errors: Use horizon_get_groups and horizon_get_group_pending to reconcile state. 409 REVISION_CONFLICT or uncertain response: read and reconcile intent, never refresh the revision and repeat automatically. Pending decisions require the original requestId; REQUEST_NOT_FOUND means it was removed/replaced. INBOX_FULL rolls back the entire action. 403 rejects group role, session or bilateral block violations. 429 is reported without automatic retry. 401 means the session is missing or expired: sign in again and retry with the new accessToken. 403 for a session means the token belongs to another user: pass the userId that signed in. Needs HORIZON_API_KEY. Every failure returns an error result (isError) with the HTTP status and body: a 401 that horizon_test_connection also returns means HORIZON_API_KEY is wrong, 429 means the account's per-minute rate limit was reached (wait a minute, then retry).

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
userIdYesSigned-in player matching the Bearer session
groupIdYesExact group UUID in the current project; never an authorization credential
requestIdYesExact pending identity from the reviewed snapshot
sessionTokenYesPlayer accessToken, sent only in Authorization
expectedRevisionYesExact reviewed revision; never replace automatically after an uncertain response

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv1.9.1

TDQS

A4.8/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already declare destructive, idempotent, open-world, and non-read-only behavior, and the description adds substantial context: removes the exact pending invitation on both sides, disallows automatic retry, and explains why same-revision replay cannot duplicate the effect. It also documents return shape, cache replacement scope, and error semantics including rollback and status-specific handling.

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 long but front-loaded and clearly sectioned into purpose, usage, requirements, side effects, returns, and errors. The detail is largely justified for a destructive, revision-sensitive operation, though it could be tightened in places.

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?

No output schema exists, but the description explicitly documents the return shape and meaning. For a complex authenticated mutation with revision and requestId constraints, it supplies enough behavioral, error, and reconciliation context for correct invocation.

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 coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds useful meaning beyond the schema by tying userId and sessionToken to the sign-in flow, emphasizing that expectedRevision is the exact reviewed revision, and clarifying that requestId is the exact pending identity from the reviewed snapshot.

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 and resource: decline a group invite using the reviewed group revision. It is readily distinguishable from sibling actions such as accept, cancel, decline request, or leave group by the named action and required pending request identity.

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 explicit use conditions ('player explicitly confirms this group action') and explicit exclusions ('Not for replacing reviewed revisions/request IDs, bypassing a leader's block, or retrying automatically'). It also names reconciliation tools and specifies when to reconcile rather than retry.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools