@lodd/mcp-server

share_site

Invite a user to view your site's analytics by sending an invitation email. Only site owners can share access; the recipient must have a Lodd account.

Instructions

Give another user access to a site's analytics. They must have a Lodd account (signed up at lodd.dev). Only the site owner can share. The invited user gets a notification email.

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": {
      "site": "<site>",
      "email": "<email>"
    },
    "name": "share_site"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`site`	Yes	Site domain or UUID
`email`	Yes	Email address of the user to invite

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.15Jul 28, 2026

TDQS

A3.9/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

No annotations, so description carries burden. Mentions notification email but omits details like reversibility, permissions granted, or success/error response.

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?

Two sentences, no redundant information. Efficient and clear.

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?

Simple action with no output schema; description covers core behavior but leaves out result details (e.g., confirmation or failure handling).

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 covers both parameters fully (site domain/UUID, email with pattern). Description adds no new parameter-specific meaning beyond prerequisites.

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?

Description clearly states the verb ('give access') and resource ('site's analytics'), distinguishing it from sibling tools like list_members or remove_member.

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?

Provides context: only site owner can share, invited user needs Lodd account, and notification email is sent. Lacks explicit 'when not to use' but implies usage boundaries.

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