Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
MCP Hub

MCP Hub

by airano-ir
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Hybrid

Supabase: Create user

supabase_create_user
Destructive

Create a Supabase user with email and password, optionally auto-confirm the email and attach app or user metadata.

Instructions

[UNIFIED] Create a new user with email and password. Can optionally auto-confirm email and set metadata.

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": {
      "site": "<site>",
      "email": "<email>",
      "password": "<password>"
    },
    "name": "supabase_create_user"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
siteYes
emailYes
phoneNo
passwordYes
app_metadataNo
email_confirmNo
user_metadataNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv3.14.0
  2. Removedv3.13.1
  3. First observedv3.4.0

TDQS

C2.9/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, idempotentHint=false and destructiveHint=true, so the description is not obligated to restate safety. It does add the auto-confirm and metadata behaviors, but omits important operational facts: that a non-idempotent create will fail or duplicate on an existing email, what auth level (service/admin key) is required, and what the response contains.

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?

Two short sentences, front-loaded with the primary action and no filler. The brevity is appropriate, though the '[UNIFIED]' tag consumes attention without conveying meaning.

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 7-parameter, 0%-documented, non-idempotent write operation with no output schema, the description is too thin. Missing coverage of site/phone, the metadata string format, and failure behavior leaves the agent guessing on a majority of the parameters.

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 description coverage is 0% across 7 parameters, so the description must carry the load. It explains password and email_confirm semantics and alludes to metadata, but never mentions 'site' or 'phone', does not distinguish app_metadata from user_metadata, and gives no hint that metadata must be supplied as a JSON string.

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+resource ('Create a new user') and names the two core fields (email and password), which is enough to distinguish it from read/update/ban siblings. It does not differentiate from the closely related invite/alternative creation paths, but the core purpose is unambiguous.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

The description implies usage (provisioning a user directly with credentials, optionally auto-confirming) but never states when to choose this over alternatives such as an invite-based flow or the sibling update/ban tools, nor any prerequisites. The '[UNIFIED]' prefix adds no actionable guidance.

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