machship-mcp

Re-enable Identities

machship_reenable_identities

Re-enable previously disabled identities by ID to restore login access. Use when accounts need access again after being disabled.

Instructions

Re-enable previously disabled identities, restoring login access.

Args:

ids (number[]): Array of identity IDs to re-enable

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`ids`	Yes	Identity IDs to re-enable

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`errors`	No	Validation errors returned by Machship, if any
`object`	No	Response payload from the Machship API

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed2 schema fields changedv1.0.1Nov 3, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / ids / items / maximum
```
Added value: +9007199254740991
```

changedOutput schema / (root)

Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "$schema": "http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#",
+  "additionalProperties": {},
+  "properties": {
+    "errors": {
+      "anyOf": [
+        {
+          "items": {},
+          "type": "array"
+        },
+        {
+          "type": "null"
+        }
+      ],
+      "description": "Validation errors returned by Machship, if any"
+    },
+    "object": {
+      "description": "Response payload from the Machship API"
+    }
+  },
+  "type": "object"
+}

First observedv1.0.0Jun 12, 2026

TDQS

A3.5/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false, so safety is covered structurally. The description adds a real consequence beyond annotations: logins are restored. However, it says nothing about required permissions, what happens when an ID is not disabled, or whether the call is safe to repeat (annotations say idempotentHint=false but the description does not explain that).

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?

The core sentence is front-loaded and earns its place. The Args block is redundant with a 100%-covered schema, which is minor waste for a one-parameter tool.

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

Completeness4/5

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

For a simple single-parameter mutation with an output schema present and clear annotations, the definition covers what the tool does and its net effect. Only permission requirements and failure behavior for non-disabled IDs are missing, which are modest gaps at this complexity.

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% and the single parameter is fully documented in the schema, including minItems and integer constraints. The 'Args:' block merely restates the schema description, adding no format or semantics beyond it, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 gives a specific verb ('Re-enable') and resource ('previously disabled identities') and adds the outcome ('restoring login access'). It implicitly distinguishes itself from the sibling machship_disable_identities by the 'previously disabled' framing, though it never names the counterpart tool.

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 phrase 'previously disabled identities' implies the precondition (the identity must already be disabled), but there is no explicit when-to-use guidance, no exclusions, and no reference to the sibling machship_disable_identities or machship_delete_identities as alternatives.

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

Deploy Server