Skip to main content
Glama
chrischall

evite-mcp

by chrischall
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

evite_add_guest

Add guests to an event's draft guest list without sending emails. Requires user confirmation first; guests persist only after the event is sent or finalized.

Instructions

Add guests to an event's draft (un-sent) guest list. Nothing is emailed until you evite_send. Asks the user to confirm first: a confirmation prompt where the client supports one; otherwise the first call returns a preview and a confirmToken, and only a repeat call with that token proceeds (see MCP_CONFIRM_MODE). NB: guests only persist on a finalized (sent/sending) event, not a bare new draft.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
guestsYesGuests to add to the draft (un-sent) list.
event_idYesEvite event id (event_id from evite_list_events).
confirmTokenNoONLY for the two-step confirmation fallback (a client without MCP elicitation). The confirmToken from this same tool's phase-1 "confirmation-required" response, passed back ONLY after the user has seen that preview and explicitly approved it in chat — never on the first call, never invented, never reused. Call again with the same arguments. Ignored when the client supports elicitation.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changedv1.3.0
    • removedInput schema / properties / confirm
      Removed value: -{
-  "description": "Must be true to proceed. Without this, the tool returns a preview.",
-  "type": "boolean"
-}
    • addedInput schema / properties / confirmToken
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "ONLY for the two-step confirmation fallback (a client without MCP elicitation). The confirmToken from this same tool's phase-1 \"confirmation-required\" response, passed back ONLY after the user has seen that preview and explicitly approved it in chat — never on the first call, never invented, never reused. Call again with the same arguments. Ignored when the client supports elicitation.",
+  "type": "string"
+}
  2. Changed1 schema field changedv1.0.0
    • changedInput schema / $schema
      Previous value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"New value: +"https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema"
  3. First observedv0.5.0

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the annotations, the description discloses the confirmation flow, the two-step confirmToken fallback, the fact that nothing is emailed until evite_send, and the important caveat that guests only persist on finalized events. This adds substantial behavioral context not present in annotations or schema.

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

Conciseness5/5

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

The description is dense but efficient: the primary action is front-loaded, followed by the key confirmation behavior and a critical persistence caveat. Every sentence earns its place with no fluff or repetition.

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?

For a tool with 3 parameters, no output schema, and moderate complexity, the description covers the main action, the confirmation workflow, the relation to sending, and the persistence caveat. Nothing essential is missing for an agent to invoke it correctly.

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

Parameters3/5

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

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema fully documents event_id, guests, and confirmToken. The description adds minimal parameter-level meaning beyond what the schema already provides, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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?

The description states a precise verb and resource: 'Add guests to an event's draft (un-sent) guest list.' It clearly differentiates this from sibling tools like evite_update_guest and evite_remove_guest by emphasizing the draft state and the eventual evite_send flow.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

The description provides clear context: use it for draft/un-sent guest lists, not finalized events, and it notes guests only persist on a finalized event. It does not explicitly name contrasting sibling tools, but the draft vs. sent distinction is enough to guide selection.

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