Skip to main content
Glama
ddonathan

IT Glue MCP Server

by ddonathan

Create IT Glue Location

itglue_create_location

Add a new physical location to an organization in IT Glue, including address details, contact information, and operational notes.

Instructions

Create a new location in IT Glue.

Args:

  • organization_id (number): Organization ID (required)

  • name (string): Location name (required)

  • primary (boolean): Is this the primary location

  • address_1 (string): Address line 1

  • address_2 (string): Address line 2

  • city (string): City

  • postal_code (string): Postal/ZIP code

  • region_id (number): Region/state ID

  • country_id (number): Country ID

  • phone (string): Phone number

  • fax (string): Fax number

  • notes (string): Notes

  • response_format (string): 'markdown' or 'json'

Returns: The created location.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
organization_idYesOrganization ID (required)
nameYesLocation name (required)
primaryNoIs this the primary location
address_1NoAddress line 1
address_2NoAddress line 2
cityNoCity
postal_codeNoPostal/ZIP code
region_idNoRegion ID (state/province)
country_idNoCountry ID
phoneNoPhone number
faxNoFax number
notesNoNotes
response_formatNoOutput format: 'markdown' for human-readable or 'json' for structured datamarkdown
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare this is a non-readOnly, non-destructive, non-idempotent, open-world operation. The description adds that it 'creates' something, which aligns with annotations (no contradiction), and mentions the return value ('The created location'), providing some behavioral context. However, it doesn't disclose important traits like potential side effects, authentication requirements, rate limits, or error conditions that aren't covered by annotations.

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?

The description is front-loaded with the core purpose, but the parameter listing is redundant with the schema and adds unnecessary length. The structure could be more efficient by omitting the Args section and focusing on value-added information. However, it's not overly verbose, and the main point is clear upfront.

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?

Given the complexity (13 parameters, creation operation) and rich schema coverage (100%), the description is minimally adequate. It states the purpose and return value, but lacks output details (no output schema), error handling, or integration context with siblings. Annotations cover basic behavioral hints, but for a creation tool, more guidance on usage and consequences would improve completeness.

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%, meaning all parameters are documented in the schema itself. The description lists parameters but merely repeats what's in the schema without adding meaningful context (e.g., explaining relationships like region_id vs. country_id, or what 'primary' means functionally). Since the schema does the heavy lifting, the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 clearly states the verb ('Create') and resource ('new location in IT Glue'), making the purpose immediately understandable. However, it doesn't differentiate this tool from other 'create' siblings like itglue_create_organization or itglue_create_contact, which would require specifying what makes a 'location' distinct from those other resources.

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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There's no mention of prerequisites (e.g., needing an existing organization), when not to use it, or how it relates to sibling tools like itglue_update_location or itglue_get_location. The agent must infer usage from the tool name alone.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/ddonathan/itglue-mcp-server'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server