Skip to main content
Glama
zentered-studios

Rivian MCP

by zentered-studios
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

rivian_get_drivers_and_keys

Read-only

List drivers, phone keys, and key fobs with access to your vehicle. Check who can unlock or start it.

Instructions

List drivers, phone keys and key fobs with access to your vehicle.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv1.9.3
    • removedInput schema / $schema
      Removed value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"
  2. Changed3 schema fields changedv1.5.4
    • removedInput schema / additionalProperties
      Removed value: -false
    • removedInput schema / properties / vehicle_id
      Removed value: -{
-  "description": "Vehicle ID from your account info",
-  "type": "string"
-}
    • removedInput schema / required
      Removed value: -[
-  "vehicle_id"
-]
  3. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

A3.5/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered structurally. The description restates the read-only listing but adds no behavioral context beyond that — no auth requirement, no indication of result size, ordering, or what happens with vehicles that have no keys.

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?

A single tight sentence with the verb and all three resource types front-loaded. No filler, no redundancy.

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 zero-parameter, read-only list with no output schema, the description covers the essential 'what'. It omits only minor context such as the auth prerequisite and whether returned key/driver identifiers feed other calls.

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

Parameters4/5

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

The tool takes zero parameters, so there is nothing for the description to disambiguate; baseline 4 applies. The description correctly implies a scopeless, full-list call.

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 ('List') and three concrete resources (drivers, phone keys, key fobs) scoped to 'your vehicle'. That is far more informative than the sibling get_* tools' resources, though it doesn't explicitly contrast itself with any sibling.

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?

Usage is implied by the resource being listed — an agent can infer this is the tool for enumerating vehicle access holders — but there is no explicit when-to-use, prerequisite (e.g., login/token), or alternative routing guidance.

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