Skip to main content
Glama

Send a notification

notify_send

Send a message to one or more saved channels. Charged only for the channels it reached. Costs $0.005 per channel reached; nothing if none are found.

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": {
      "channels": "<channels>",
      "message": "<message>"
    },
    "name": "notify_send"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
linkNoAn https link to open, e.g. the deal or ticket.
titleNo
urgentNoHigh priority where the channel has one (ntfy, Pushover).
messageYes
channelsYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A3.5/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare that this is a non-idempotent, open-world, non-destructive write operation. The description adds useful behavioral context beyond that by explaining the per-channel charge and that there is no cost when no channels are found.

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?

The description is three short sentences, front-loads the core action, and follows with relevant billing information. Every sentence adds useful information without repetition or padding.

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 send-style tool with no output schema, it covers the core action and billing model but leaves significant gaps: delivery confirmation, what happens if a channel is missing, retry behavior given non-idempotency, and any return-value information are not addressed.

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

Parameters2/5

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

Schema description coverage is only 40%, so the description should compensate by clarifying parameter meaning. Instead, it only mentions 'saved channels' and 'message' generically and says nothing about the optional title, link, or urgent parameters, or the message length and channel naming constraints.

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?

The description states a specific verb and resource: send a message to one or more saved channels. It distinguishes the action from channel-management siblings only implicitly through the phrase 'saved channels,' but it does not name alternatives such as notify_request_approval.

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: use this to send messages to saved channels. However, there is no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance, and no comparison with related tools like notify_request_approval or notify_subscribe.

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

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources