Skip to main content
Glama

invite_user

Add new users to Devici by sending email invitations with specified roles and personal details for team collaboration.

Instructions

Invite a new user to Devici

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
emailYes
first_nameYes
last_nameYes
roleYes

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Implementation Reference

  • The MCP tool handler for 'invite_user', registered with @mcp.tool(). It creates an API client context and delegates to the client's invite_user method to perform the invitation.
    @mcp.tool()
    async def invite_user(email: str, first_name: str, last_name: str, role: str) -> str:
        """Invite a new user to Devici"""
        async with create_client_from_env() as client:
            result = await client.invite_user(email, first_name, last_name, role)
            return str(result)
  • API client helper method that constructs the user data payload and makes an authenticated POST request to the '/users/invite' endpoint.
    async def invite_user(self, email: str, first_name: str, last_name: str, role: str) -> Dict[str, Any]:
        """Invite specific user."""
        user_data = {
            "email": email,
            "firstName": first_name,
            "lastName": last_name,
            "role": role
        }
        return await self._make_request("POST", "/users/invite", json_data=user_data)
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. 'Invite a new user' implies a mutation operation that likely requires administrative permissions and sends an invitation email, but none of these behavioral aspects are explicitly stated. The description doesn't mention what happens after invocation, whether the invitation is reversible, or any rate limits or constraints.

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 perfectly concise at just 5 words, front-loading the essential action and target. Every word earns its place with zero redundancy or unnecessary elaboration. It's appropriately sized for a straightforward invitation operation.

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?

Given that this is a mutation tool with no annotations, 4 undocumented parameters, but with an output schema present, the description provides minimal but adequate context for basic understanding. The existence of an output schema means the description doesn't need to explain return values, but it should do more to explain the behavioral implications of a user invitation operation and parameter requirements.

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

Parameters2/5

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

With 0% schema description coverage for all 4 required parameters, the description provides no additional semantic context about what each parameter means or expects. The schema only provides titles ('Email', 'First Name', etc.) but no descriptions of format requirements, constraints, or valid values (especially for 'role'). The description doesn't compensate for this schema gap at all.

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 ('Invite') and resource ('a new user to Devici'), making the purpose immediately understandable. It doesn't differentiate from sibling tools, but since no other user invitation tools exist in the sibling list, this is adequate. The description avoids tautology by not just restating the tool name.

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. While it's the only user invitation tool among siblings, there's no mention of prerequisites, permissions required, or when this operation is appropriate versus other user management approaches. The agent must infer usage context 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.

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/sdelements/devici-mcp'

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