Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Kiln

Kiln

by codeofaxel
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python

create_org

Create a new organization under a Kiln Business account; the creator becomes its owner. Specify a name, unique slug, owner tenant, and plan tier (pro, business, or enterprise).

Instructions

Create a new org. The person who creates it becomes its owner. tier is one of pro, business, enterprise.

Needs Kiln Business.

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>",
      "slug": "<slug>",
      "owner_tenant": "<owner_tenant>"
    },
    "name": "create_org"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameYesThe org's display name. Must not be empty. Not used on Kiln's hosted server.
slugYesThe org's short unique name. Must not be empty. Not used on Kiln's hosted server.
tierNoThe org's plan: ``"pro"`` (the default), ``"business"`` or ``"enterprise"``. Any other value is refused. Not used on Kiln's hosted server. Default: "pro".
ask_idNoThe id an earlier ``APPROVAL_REQUIRED`` answer returned. Pass it on the repeat call to learn whether the person approved; omit it on the first call.
owner_tenantYesThe account that owns the new org. On Kiln's hosted server it is always the signed-in caller.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv1.5.1

TDQS

B3.4/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds two genuinely new behavioral facts: the caller becomes the owner, and the operation requires a Kiln Business plan. It omits other meaningful behavior, such as what happens on a duplicate slug or that a first call may return APPROVAL_REQUIRED requiring an ask_id repeat.

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?

Four short sentences, front-loaded with the action and its ownership side effect, with the prerequisite placed last. The tier sentence largely restates the schema's tier description, which is the only clearly wasted content.

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

Completeness3/5

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

This is a mutating provisioning tool with no output schema, so the description should ideally say what is returned (an org identifier) and how the ask_id approval loop is expected to be driven. The plan prerequisite and ownership rule help, but the two-step approval mechanics are only learnable from the schema field, leaving the definition adequate but not self-sufficient.

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 already documents name, slug, tier, ask_id and owner_tenant in detail. The description's tier enumeration (pro/business/enterprise) duplicates what the schema's tier field already says, adding no syntax, format or constraint information beyond it. Baseline 3 is correct when the schema carries the parameter burden.

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?

The description opens with a specific verb+resource pair, "Create a new org," and adds the ownership consequence, so an agent immediately knows this is an org-provisioning call rather than a listing or member-management call in the same family (list_my_orgs, add_org_member). It stops short of naming a sibling tool or differentiating explicitly, which keeps it at 4 rather than 5.

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?

"Needs Kiln Business" is a real stated prerequisite that tells the agent this call may fail on a non-Business tier, which is useful gating context. There is no guidance on when to prefer this tool over alternatives or on how to handle the multi-step approval path implied by the ask_id parameter, so usage is only implied.

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