Skip to main content
Glama
kychee-com

run402-mcp

by kychee-com
OverviewSchemaRelated ServersScoreDiscussions
TypeScript
Local

initiate_project_transfer

Initiate a project transfer to a wallet, email, or organization. The recipient completes via accept or claim; owner-side mutations freeze until completion or expiry.

Instructions

Initiate a project transfer (owned-org recipient shape v1.96+). Addressed to a WALLET (to_wallet, completed by accept_project_transfer), an EMAIL (to_email, completed by claim_project_transfer), OR an owned ORG (to_org_id, same-actor move that completes immediately in the first gateway release) — provide exactly one. You must currently own/admin the project; for to_org_id you must be an active owner of both the source and destination orgs. Wallet/email transfers create a pending row with 72h expiry and freeze owner-side mutations until completed, cancelled, or expired. The recipient gets the project under the migrate billing policy. Owner's tier lease is NOT refunded. GitHub repo ownership is NOT transferred. Calls POST /projects/v1/:project_id/transfers.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
messageNoOptional free-text note shown to the recipient in the preview and notification emails.
to_emailNoRecipient EMAIL. Provide EXACTLY ONE of `to_wallet`, `to_email`, or `to_org_id`. An email recipient completes the transfer via `claim_project_transfer` (they claim it into an org they own).
to_org_idNoDestination ORG id. Provide EXACTLY ONE of `to_wallet`, `to_email`, or `to_org_id`. First gateway release is same-actor only: caller must be an active owner of the source org and destination org. Completes immediately and returns project keys.
to_walletNoRecipient WALLET address (any case — the gateway lowercases). Provide EXACTLY ONE of `to_wallet`, `to_email`, or `to_org_id`. A wallet recipient completes the transfer via `accept_project_transfer`.
project_idYesProject id to transfer. You must currently own or admin it (the gateway verifies against fresh DB state).
billing_policyNoWallet rail only. Phase 1A supports only `migrate` (default). The project moves into the recipient's organization.
kysigned_record_idNoWallet rail only. Optional KySigned record id. Phase 1A stores this verbatim (no verification).
retain_collaborator_roleNoEmail rail only (v1.91): keep a `developer` membership in the recipient's org after the transfer completes. The recipient must accept it at claim time (`accept_retained_collaborator`). Omit for a full severance.

Tool Definition Quality

A4.7/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses multiple behavioral traits: 72h expiry, freeze of owner mutations, no refund of tier lease, no GitHub transfer, billing policy migrate, and immediate completion for org. Minor missing details like what happens on expiry or cancellation, but overall strong.

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 dense paragraph with clear logical flow: purpose, recipient options, prerequisites, side effects, and version notes. Every sentence adds value, no wasted words.

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?

Given 8 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description covers purpose, usage, behavior, and parameter semantics comprehensively. It explains all three recipient paths and their consequences. Could mention error handling or expiry behavior in more detail, but overall quite complete.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters5/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3, but the description adds significant value beyond the schema: it explains the exclusivity of the three recipient parameters, the pending vs immediate behavior, default billing policy, and the purpose of retain_collaborator_role for email rail.

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 tool initiates a project transfer and specifies three distinct recipient types (wallet, email, org), each with its own completion path. It distinguishes from sibling tools like accept_project_transfer and claim_project_transfer by describing the flow.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description provides explicit guidance on when to use each recipient type, prerequisites (must own/admin project, for org must own both orgs), and the behavioral differences (pending row with 72h expiry for wallet/email, immediate completion for org). It contrasts with sibling tools named in the context.

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/kychee-com/run402-mcp'

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