Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
nexterm-mcp

nexterm-mcp

by X1pheR
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Remote

nexterm_create_organization

Create a new Nexterm organization with a required name and optional description to group and manage server entries.

Instructions

Create a Nexterm organization.

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": {
      "name": "<name>"
    },
    "name": "nexterm_create_organization"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameYes
descriptionNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.2.0

TDQS

D1.9/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=false, and openWorldHint=true, so the write/non-idempotent nature is covered structurally. The description adds nothing beyond that: it does not say whether names must be unique, whether the caller becomes owner/admin, what permissions are required, or whether duplicate calls error out.

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?

It is a single short sentence with no padding, so nothing is wasted, but it is sized far below what a mutation tool with undocumented parameters needs; brevity here is under-specification rather than efficient communication.

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

Completeness1/5

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

For a non-idempotent create operation with two parameters at 0% schema coverage and no output schema, the description should explain required inputs, uniqueness constraints, and result behavior. It says none of this, leaving the agent to guess at correct invocation.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters1/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0% and the description supplies no parameter meaning at all. It never explains that 'name' is the required display name (uniqueness/slug behavior unknown) or that 'description' is an optional free-text field with a 500-character cap.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose2/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description restates the tool name nearly verbatim ('Create a Nexterm organization' for nexterm_create_organization) and adds no scope, target entity detail, or differentiation from siblings such as nexterm_update_organization or nexterm_create_folder.

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 guidance on when to create an organization versus other setup paths, no mention of prerequisites (permissions, existing orgs), and no reference to any alternative tool.

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