Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Shager

by ai.shager
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Set who gets the client report

set_client_report
DestructiveIdempotent

Who gets the monthly report by email (up to 10 addresses; [] stops the emails), its language, and/or a new link. Each recipient gets the link for the month that just ended on the 1st, from 08:00 in the workspace's time zone, with a link to stop getting it. regenerate: true makes a new link and the old one stops working at once: use it when the link reached someone it shouldn't. Shager then emails these people every month on its own, so it needs the publish scope and a claimed organization: only add addresses your human asked for (the client's own, or theirs). (Not available in an unclaimed sandbox.)

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": {
      "workspace_id": "<workspace_id>"
    },
    "name": "set_client_report"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
langNoThe report's and the email's language
recipientsNoEvery address that should get it (replaces the list)
regenerateNotrue: a new link; the old one stops working
workspace_idYesWorkspace id from list_workspaces

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Added

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

The description adds substantial context beyond the annotations: monthly email timing, timezone behavior, unsubscribe link inclusion, immediate invalidation of old links on regeneration, required publish scope, claimed organization, and privacy caution around adding addresses. These details materially improve safe invocation of a destructive, open-world mutation.

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 purpose and constraints are front-loaded, and most sentences carry actionable information. The description is dense and somewhat long, with operational email timing details that are useful but not all strictly necessary for invocation.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a complex external-side-effect mutation with no output schema, the description covers prerequisites, side effects, timing, privacy constraints, and sandbox limitations. An agent has enough context to decide whether and how to call it safely.

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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3, but the description adds meaningful semantics for key parameters: recipients are capped at 10 and [] stops emails, while regenerate:true creates a new link and invalidates the old one immediately. It adds less beyond the schema for lang and workspace_id, so it is strong but not exhaustive.

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?

The description specifically identifies the operation: configuring who receives the monthly client report by email, the report language, and optional link regeneration. It names the resource and scope clearly enough that an agent can distinguish it from read-oriented siblings like get_client_report.

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?

It gives clear usage conditions, including that [] stops emails, regenerate should be used when a link reached the wrong person, and the tool is unavailable in an unclaimed sandbox. It does not explicitly name get_client_report or another sibling as the alternative for viewing current settings, so it falls just short of full when/when-not/alternatives guidance.

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

All Shager toolsInspect
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