Skip to main content
Glama
chrischall

zola-mcp

by chrischall
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

add_guest

Add a new guest household to a Zola wedding guest list by providing the primary guest's first and last name, with optional contact and plus-one details.

Instructions

Add a new guest group (household) to the guest list

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
emailNoGuest email address
phoneNoGuest phone number
last_nameYesPrimary guest last name
first_nameYesPrimary guest first name
affiliationNoAffiliation (default: PRIMARY_FRIEND)
plus_one_last_nameNoPlus-one last name
plus_one_first_nameNoPlus-one first name

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv2.0.0
    • changedInput schema / $schema
      Previous value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"New value: +"https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema"
  2. First observedv1.4.2

TDQS

C2.9/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

Annotations only declare openWorldHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the description must carry the behavioral burden. 'Add' implies mutation, but nothing states whether this creates at wedding level vs event level, whether duplicates are rejected, or what permissions are needed.

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?

A single, front-loaded sentence with no filler. Nothing to trim and the key concept (household grouping) appears immediately.

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-param mutation tool with no output schema and thin annotations, the description omits permissions, duplicate handling, and crucially whether the guest is added to the wedding roster or a specific event — a real ambiguity given invite_guest_to_event and set_event_guests siblings.

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 coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds the 'guest group (household)' framing, which explains why plus_one fields and affiliation exist on a single 'add guest' call, but it doesn't document any parameter formats or defaults.

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?

Specific verb+resource ('Add a new guest group (household) to the guest list'), and the parenthetical clarifies the household-grouping concept. However, it doesn't differentiate from siblings like invite_guest_to_event or update_guest, leaving ambiguity about which guest-related verb to pick.

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?

No when-to-use guidance, no exclusions, no mention of alternatives such as invite_guest_to_event for event-level invitations. The agent gets zero routing help despite a dense sibling cluster of guest tools.

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