Summer

This connector has been deprecated

This was a duplicate manual listing. Use Summer’s official listing, imported from the official MCP Registry. Summer’s MCP server remains active at https://api.gosummer.ai/mcp. Setup and documentation: https://gosummer.ai/docs/mcp-clients.

Change the sender name or turn a support email address on or off, with the expected version

summer_messenger_email_update

Change the sender name or turn a support email address on or off, with the expected version. Turning on needs one received email. Turning off keeps every email but stops new conversations and replies.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "company": "<company>",
      "environment": "<environment>",
      "channel": "<channel>",
      "version": "<version>"
    },
    "name": "summer_messenger_email_update"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`channel`	Yes
`company`	Yes	Summer company ID
`enabled`	No
`version`	Yes
`environment`	Yes	Environment that owns the resource
`display_name`	No
`idempotency_key`	No	Reuse the same key when retrying the same change

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

AddedOct 22, 2026

TDQS

A3.6/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Adds real substance beyond the annotations: a precondition (enabling requires a received email) and the effect of disabling (keeps every email, stops new conversations/replies). This aligns with destructiveHint=false by clarifying that disabling is non-destructive and reversible. It still doesn't explain the optimistic-versioning failure behavior or auth requirements in prose.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the core action and followed by the key enable/disable behavior. The first sentence largely restates the title, which is slightly redundant but not wasteful.

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?

For a 7-parameter mutation tool with low schema coverage and no output schema, the description covers preconditions and disable semantics but omits per-parameter meaning and sibling differentiation. Adequate but with clear gaps.

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 only 43%, so the description should compensate. It implicitly maps 'sender name' to display_name, 'on/off' to enabled, and 'expected version' to version, which is helpful, but channel, environment, and idempotency_key are left to the schema.

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 specific verbs (change/turn on/off) and resources (sender name, support email address), so the agent knows this is a mutation of the email identity. It does not explicitly contrast with siblings like summer_messenger_email_create or summer_messenger_email_read, so differentiation is implied rather than stated.

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?

Use is implied by the two described operations (rename vs enable/disable), and 'Turning on needs one received email' gives a precondition. However, there is no explicit when-to-use vs alternatives routing against the email_create/read/check siblings.

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

All Summer tools Inspect

Try in Browser

One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources

Need Help?