Wistia MCP Server

Create Webinar Collaborator

create_webinar_collaborator

Destructive

Invite a webinar collaborator by email, automatically creating a new contact if none exists; viewers cannot be added as collaborators.

Instructions

Invites a collaborator (producer) to a webinar by specifying their email address. Creates a new contact if one doesn't exist with that email. Note that viewers cannot be webinar collaborators.

Requires api token with one of the following permissions

Read, update & delete anything

Tokens with the "Act with a team member's permissions" permission (all:delegate_to_contact_permissions scope) can also be used. Requests made with such a token are authorized using the permissions of the contact assigned to the token. Requires confirm=true for the requested mutation. May share access, notify people or incur provider charges.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`email`	No	Email address of the contact to invite. Creates a new contact if one doesn't exist. Note that viewers cannot be webinar collaborators.
`account`	No	Named private Wistia account; selects credentials, not a remote account ID.
`confirm`	No	Must be true for the specific user-requested write.
`payload`	No	Complete JSON request body instead of body flags. Supports current nested customization, caption and nullable values.
`webinar_id`	Yes	Hashed ID of the webinar
`payload_file`	No	Regular local JSON body file, at most 5 MB. Cannot be mixed with body flags or payload.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv2.0.0Oct 2, 2026

TDQS

A4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already flag destructive/openWorld/non-idempotent, but the description adds meaningful context beyond them: new contacts are created on the fly, a specific permission scope is required, confirm=true is mandatory, and the call may share access, notify people, or incur charges.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Purpose is front-loaded in the first sentence, but the embedded multi-line permission code block is bulky and adds significant length relative to the core instruction. The essential routing and confirmation logic could be tighter.

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?

For a mutation tool with no output schema and full annotation coverage, the description supplies the prerequisites (permissions, confirm) and side effects (contact creation, notifications, charges) an agent needs. Return format is undocumented but not critical for this write.

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 coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents email, confirm, account, payload, and payload_file. The description largely restates the email behavior already in the schema; it adds only the token-permission context, not param syntax. Baseline 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?

States a specific verb (invites), resource (collaborator/producer), and scope (to a webinar via email). Clearly distinguishes the write from siblings like list_webinar_collaborators and delete_webinar_collaborator.

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?

Gives an explicit exclusion ('viewers cannot be webinar collaborators') and the confirm=true requirement, which tells the agent when this call is valid. It stops short of naming an alternative tool, but the context is clear.

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

Deploy Server