Cooper Email

Update a sub-account

cooper_update_workspace

Idempotent

Use this when a parent should rename a sub-account or change how many live inboxes it may hold. Requires auth. Inputs: workspace_id (required), name (optional; 1–64 characters), inbox_quota (optional integer, at least 1). Returns the workspace {id, name, inbox_quota, inboxes_used, account_id, api_key_prefix, created_at}. An inbox_quota below the current live inboxes returns 409 quota_below_usage and changes nothing. Another parent's workspace returns 404 workspace_not_found. A sub-account key returns 403 permission_denied. An inbox-scoped key returns 403 permission_denied.

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`name`	No	New name, 1–64 characters. Omit it to leave the name unchanged.
`inbox_quota`	No	New maximum live inboxes. A value below current live inboxes is 409 quota_below_usage.
`workspace_id`	Yes	Workspace id (ws_…) created by this parent account

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description
`id`	No	Workspace id.
`name`	No	Human-readable name.
`api_key`	No	Workspace API key, returned only once on create. Never repeat it in full.
`account_id`	No	Sub-account id for this workspace.
`created_at`	No	ISO-8601 time the object was created.
`inbox_quota`	No	Most inboxes the workspace may hold.
`inboxes_used`	No	Live inboxes in the workspace.
`api_key_prefix`	No	First characters of the workspace key, for display.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedNov 3, 2026

changedOutput schema / (root)

Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "additionalProperties": true,
+  "description": "The workspace after the update.",
+  "properties": {
+    "account_id": {
+      "description": "Sub-account id for this workspace."
+    },
+    "api_key": {
+      "description": "Workspace API key, returned only once on create. Never repeat it in full."
+    },
+    "api_key_prefix": {
+      "description": "First characters of the workspace key, for display."
+    },
+    "created_at": {
+      "description": "ISO-8601 time the object was created."
+    },
+    "id": {
+      "description": "Workspace id."
+    },
+    "inbox_quota": {
+      "description": "Most inboxes the workspace may hold."
+    },
+    "inboxes_used": {
+      "description": "Live inboxes in the workspace."
+    },
+    "name": {
+      "description": "Human-readable name."
+    }
+  },
+  "type": "object"
+}

AddedOct 9, 2026

TDQS

A4.1/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Well beyond the annotations, it discloses the auth requirement, the exact error codes and messages (409 quota_below_usage, 404 workspace_not_found, 403 permission_denied for both sub-account and inbox-scoped keys), and the crucial atomicity guarantee that a failed quota change 'changes nothing'. Nothing here contradicts idempotentHint or destructiveHint=false.

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 usage trigger, then auth, inputs, return shape, and error cases in a compact block. The 'Inputs:' sentence duplicates the schema somewhat, but the remaining sentences (errors, atomicity) earn their place.

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 three-parameter mutation with full schema coverage and an output schema, nothing material is missing: the agent knows permissions, failure semantics, atomicity, and the shape of the result. Listing the returned fields is slightly redundant with the output schema but harmless.

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 100%, so the schema already carries the meaning of name, inbox_quota, and workspace_id; the description largely restates them. The only added detail is 'at least 1' for inbox_quota, which is not in the schema, but that is a small increment.

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 gives a specific verb and resource ('rename a sub-account or change how many live inboxes it may hold') and enumerates the two mutable fields, which separates it in practice from create/delete/get workspace and from cooper_update_inbox. It never names a sibling tool, so it falls short of the top band.

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?

'Use this when a parent should rename a sub-account or change how many live inboxes it may hold' supplies a clear trigger condition, and the listed 403/404 failure modes implicitly define when the call is not valid. There is no explicit statement of alternatives (e.g., when to use cooper_update_inbox instead) or prerequisites beyond 'Requires auth'.

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.