accept_delegationAccept a delegation invitation using the token from the invite link. Creates/links your account and grants operator access. Returns a bearer token for the delegated account.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| token | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It discloses that accepting the delegation creates/links an account and grants operator access, and returns a bearer token. This is adequate behavioral disclosure for a one-time accept action.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Two sentences, no wasted words. The description is front-loaded with the core action and immediately specifies the required input.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
With one parameter, no output schema, and no nested objects, the description covers all necessary aspects: what happens (accepts delegation, creates/links account, grants access) and what the agent gets (bearer token). No gaps.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema has 0% description coverage, so the description must compensate. It explains that the 'token' parameter comes from the invite link, adding meaningful context beyond the schema's minLength constraint.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description clearly states the action (accept delegation invitation), what it requires (token from invite link), what it does (creates/links account, grants operator access), and what it returns (bearer token). It distinguishes itself from siblings like 'delegate_service' and 'revoke_delegation'.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The description explicitly says to use when you have an invite link token, which implies the context of use. It does not explicitly mention when not to use or alternative tools, but the purpose is clear enough for an agent to decide.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Tools are cleanly separated into auth, billing, VPS lifecycle, tickets, and delegation, and each maps to a distinct resource/action. A few pairs like set_password vs reset_password and pay_invoice vs topup_balance share surface similarity, but their descriptions draw clear boundaries.
Naming is strongly consistent with verb_noun snake_case patterns such as order_vps, list_tickets, and revoke_delegation. Minor deviations are the bare CLI-style verbs login and whoami, plus the slightly awkward topup_balance, but these do not undermine the overall pattern.
27 tools is on the high side, but the server covers several distinct subdomains—account management, billing, VPS operations, support tickets, and delegations—and each tool appears to earn its place. The count is heavy but not unreasonable for the breadth of functionality exposed.
Core workflows are covered end-to-end: account creation/login, ordering and provisioning, power/reinstall/cancel, ticket conversations, and delegation management all have the necessary operations. Minor gaps exist, such as no change-password tool, no explicit RDNS/console tool despite delegation mentioning them, and no plan upgrade/downgrade tool.