Wistia MCP Server

Invite Contacts

invite_contacts

Destructive

Invites one or more people to a Wistia account by email, accepting comma, whitespace, or newline lists and creating contacts as needed.

Instructions

Invites one or more people to the account by email. Accepts a comma/whitespace/newline-separated list; each entry becomes a new contact if one does not already exist for that email.

Requires api token with one of the following permissions

Read, update & delete anything

Requires confirm=true for the requested mutation. May share access, notify people or incur provider charges.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "invite_contacts"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`account`	No	Named private Wistia account; selects credentials, not a remote account ID.
`confirm`	No	Set true only when the user asked for exactly this action.
`payload`	No	Complete JSON request body instead of body flags. Supports current nested customization, caption and nullable values.
`contacts`	No
`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.

Changed8 schema fields changedv3.0.0Oct 7, 2026

addedInput schema / $defs

Added value: +{
+  "contacts": {
+    "description": "A comma-, whitespace-, or newline-separated list of email addresses to\ninvite to the account. Each entry becomes a new contact if one does not\nalready exist for that email.\n",
+    "type": "string"
+  }
+}

changedInput schema / properties / confirm / description

Previous value: -"Must be true for the specific user-requested write."New value: +"Set true only when the user asked for exactly this action."

addedInput schema / properties / contacts / $ref
```
Added value: +"#/$defs/contacts"
```

removedInput schema / properties / contacts / description

Removed value: -"A comma-, whitespace-, or newline-separated list of email addresses to\ninvite to the account. Each entry becomes a new contact if one does not\nalready exist for that email.\n"

removedInput schema / properties / contacts / type
```
Removed value: -"string"
```
addedInput schema / properties / payload / properties / contacts / $ref
```
Added value: +"#/$defs/contacts"
```

removedInput schema / properties / payload / properties / contacts / description

Removed value: -"A comma-, whitespace-, or newline-separated list of email addresses to\ninvite to the account. Each entry becomes a new contact if one does not\nalready exist for that email.\n"

removedInput schema / properties / payload / properties / contacts / type
```
Removed value: -"string"
```

First observedv2.0.0Oct 2, 2026

TDQS

A3.7/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, openWorldHint=true and idempotentHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds substantive context beyond that: the exact permission scope required, the confirm=true mandate, and the side effects ('may share access, notify people or incur provider charges') that explain why the operation is open-world and potentially billable.

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

Conciseness4/5

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

The core behavior is front-loaded in the first sentence, followed by the input format and the precondition/side-effect notes. The permission block is formatted in a slightly noisy way but carries real information, and there is no filler sentence.

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 5-parameter tool with a nested payload object and no output schema, the description covers the essentials: what happens, the required permission, the confirm requirement, and side effects. It leaves a small gap around which of the three body-passing parameters to choose, but nothing critical to correct invocation is missing.

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 80%, so the schema already documents contacts, confirm, account and payload_file. The description restates the contacts list format ('comma/whitespace/newline-separated') and the create-if-absent semantics, which largely duplicates the $defs text. It says nothing about the mutually exclusive payload vs. body-flags vs. payload_file paths.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Invites one or more people to the account by email') plus the input format, so the operation is unambiguous. No sibling tool invites contacts, so no routing is needed, but the description also makes no attempt to situate itself against alternatives, which is the only thing separating it from a 5.

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?

It gives a precondition ('Requires confirm=true for the requested mutation') and the required token permission, which is genuinely useful gating guidance. However, it never says when this tool is appropriate versus other contact/account operations, and provides no when-not guidance beyond the confirm flag. Usage is implied rather than stated.

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

Deploy Server