Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Okta MCP Server

Okta MCP Server

by kapilduraphe
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Hybrid

deactivate_user

Deactivate a user in Okta by providing their unique identifier, enabling efficient user management through the Okta MCP Server.

Instructions

Deactivate a user in Okta

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": {
      "userId": "<userId>"
    },
    "name": "deactivate_user"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
userIdYesThe unique identifier of the Okta user

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

C2.9/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. While 'Deactivate' implies a mutation, it lacks details on permissions required, reversibility, side effects (e.g., data retention), or response format. This is a significant gap for a potentially destructive operation.

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, direct sentence with no wasted words, making it highly concise and front-loaded. It efficiently communicates the core purpose without unnecessary elaboration.

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?

For a mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is insufficient. It fails to address critical aspects like behavioral traits, error handling, or return values, leaving gaps that could hinder effective tool use by an AI agent.

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%, with the parameter 'userId' clearly documented in the schema. The description does not add any meaning beyond this, such as format examples or validation rules, so it meets the baseline for adequate but unenhanced parameter documentation.

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 action ('Deactivate') and resource ('a user in Okta'), making the purpose immediately understandable. However, it does not differentiate this tool from its sibling 'suspend_user', which likely serves a similar but distinct function, preventing a perfect score.

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 like 'suspend_user' or 'delete_user', nor does it mention prerequisites or context for deactivation. Without such information, users 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.

Deploy Server

Other Tools

Related Tools