Cooper Email

Billing status

cooper_billing_status

Read-onlyIdempotent

Use this when you need to know the account's plan, how much of its monthly quota is used, or why a send or inbox create returned 402. Read-only; requires auth; no inputs. Returns {plan, plan_name, status, usage:{period, sends, inboxes}, limits:{inboxes, emails_per_month, custom_domains}, addons:{available, path, inboxes, domains, email_packs}, upgrade:{next_plan, upgrade_url}, …}. addons.available is true on Starter and Pro. Buy or change those quantities with cooper_set_addons.

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description
`plan`	No	Plan id: free, starter, or pro.
`usage`	No	{period, sends, inboxes} used this period.
`addons`	No	{available, path, inboxes, domains, email_packs}. Change them with cooper_set_addons.
`limits`	No	Plan limits that apply to this account.
`status`	No	Subscription status.
`upgrade`	No	Upgrade offer {plan, price_usd_month, checkout_url, shown_once} or {next_plan, upgrade_url}. Give the link to the human.
`plan_name`	No	Display name of the plan.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedNov 3, 2026

changedOutput schema / (root)

Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "additionalProperties": true,
+  "description": "Plan, usage, limits, and add-ons.",
+  "properties": {
+    "addons": {
+      "description": "{available, path, inboxes, domains, email_packs}. Change them with cooper_set_addons."
+    },
+    "limits": {
+      "description": "Plan limits that apply to this account."
+    },
+    "plan": {
+      "description": "Plan id: free, starter, or pro."
+    },
+    "plan_name": {
+      "description": "Display name of the plan."
+    },
+    "status": {
+      "description": "Subscription status."
+    },
+    "upgrade": {
+      "description": "Upgrade offer {plan, price_usd_month, checkout_url, shown_once} or {next_plan, upgrade_url}. Give the link to the human."
+    },
+    "usage": {
+      "description": "{period, sends, inboxes} used this period."
+    }
+  },
+  "type": "object"
+}

First observedSep 27, 2026

TDQS

A4.6/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered; the description still adds real context by noting 'requires auth', 'no inputs', and the addons.available condition on Starter and Pro. The return-shape sketch is largely redundant with the existing output schema, which keeps this below a 5.

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?

Front-loaded with the use case, then behavior, then the return shape, then the sibling pointer — a sensible ordering with no filler sentences. The long inline enumeration of return fields is the one portion that costs more words than it earns, since an output schema already exists.

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?

Covers purpose, prerequisites (auth), input expectations (none), return contents, and the follow-up tool for changes — everything an agent needs to call a zero-argument read tool correctly. The 402 diagnostic framing also ties it to the error path an agent is most likely to hit.

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 the baseline is 4, and the description correctly states 'no inputs' rather than leaving the agent to wonder whether a plan or period argument is needed. There is no additional parameter nuance to convey.

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?

States a specific resource (the account's plan, quota usage, and limits) and a concrete diagnostic use case (explaining a 402 from send or inbox create). It is clearly separable from the write-side siblings cooper_set_addons and cooper_upgrade_link, which the description names explicitly.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Gives explicit triggers ('when you need to know the account's plan, how much of its monthly quota is used, or why a send or inbox create returned 402') and routes the mutation case to the correct alternative: 'Buy or change those quantities with cooper_set_addons.' An agent does not need to guess between this and the addon/upgrade tools.

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

All Cooper Email 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.