Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
@illodev/taiga-mcp

@illodev/taiga-mcp

by illodev
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

taiga_memberships_bulk_create

Bulk invite multiple users to a Taiga project by passing an array of usernames and role IDs in a single request, replacing manual per-member invitations.

Instructions

Bulk invite members to a project.

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": {
      "project_id": "<project_id>",
      "bulk_memberships": "<bulk_memberships>"
    },
    "name": "taiga_memberships_bulk_create"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
project_idYesProject ID
bulk_membershipsYesArray of membership invitations

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

B3.4/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, and the description only says 'Bulk invite members to a project.' It does not disclose whether this is a write operation, what permissions are required, whether existing memberships are affected, or what happens on partial failure. The description carries the full burden and falls short.

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?

The description is a single, clear sentence with no redundant words. It is concise and front-loaded, effectively communicating the core purpose without unnecessary detail.

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?

Despite having complete schema documentation, the tool lacks annotations and an output schema. The description does not mention return values, permissions, side effects, or error behavior. For a mutation operation, this is insufficient for an agent to fully understand the tool's behavior and invoke it correctly.

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?

The input schema already provides full descriptions for both parameters (project_id and bulk_memberships), including the nested role_id and username. The description adds no additional parameter semantics, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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?

The description clearly states the action ('Bulk invite') and resource ('members to a project'), making it obvious what the tool does. It also differentiates from the singular taiga_memberships_create tool by emphasizing 'bulk'.

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 word 'bulk' implies it should be used for multiple memberships, but there is no explicit guidance on when to use this vs. taiga_memberships_create or other alternatives. It lacks specific when-to-use/when-not-to-use instructions.

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