Skip to main content
Glama

Cooper Email

by com.cooperemail
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Show account and key

cooper_whoami
Idempotent

Use this when you need to see which Cooper account this connection is using and whether the API key is limited to one inbox or a permission list. Requires auth. Optional input lifecycle_emails is on or off and sets whether this account receives weekly product notes in its inbox. Omit it to leave the setting unchanged. Returns {account_id, parent_account_id, auth_type, key:{id, name, prefix, inbox_id, permissions, expires_at}|null, workspace:{id, inbox_quota}|null, lifecycle_emails, notices, whats_new, owner_recommended}. owner_recommended is present when the account has no verified owner. It names POST /api/v1/inboxes/{id}/owners and the onboard owner_email field, and it mentions the 50 percent Free send increase for a verified external owner. notices lists limit_warning rows when usage is at 80 percent of inboxes, monthly sends, or custom domains. whats_new lists the newest two or three user-facing changelog highlights. auth_type is api_key or oauth. key is null for an OAuth token, which has full access. permissions null means every permission. workspace is set when this account is a sub-account. Fails with 401 unauthorized, 401 api_key_revoked, or 401 api_key_expired. This tool does not mint or revoke keys. Use POST /api/v1/keys over HTTP so a key secret is not written into the chat transcript.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
lifecycle_emailsNoOptional. on delivers the weekly product note. off stops it. Omit to leave the setting unchanged.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / lifecycle_emails
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Optional. on delivers the weekly product note. off stops it. Omit to leave the setting unchanged.",
+  "enum": [
+    "on",
+    "off"
+  ],
+  "type": "string"
+}
  2. Added

TDQS

A4.8/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

With annotations only supplying readOnly/idempotent/destructive flags, the description carries the real behavioral load: "Requires auth", the exact 401 failure modes (unauthorized, api_key_revoked, api_key_expired), null semantics for key on OAuth tokens and for permissions, the sub-account condition for workspace, and the side effect of lifecycle_emails. Nothing contradicts the annotations, since setting lifecycle_emails justifies readOnlyHint=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?

It is front-loaded correctly (purpose, then auth, then the parameter, then return shape, then errors, then the exclusion) and nearly every sentence carries non-obvious information. It is dense and runs long for a one-parameter tool, but with no output schema the return-shape enumeration is earning its space.

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 tool with no output schema, the description compensates fully by enumerating the returned fields and their edge cases (key null for OAuth, permissions null = all, workspace for sub-accounts, owner_recommended conditional) plus error codes and the mutation boundary. An agent has everything needed to call and interpret it.

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% and the schema already documents the on/off/omit semantics, so the baseline is 3. The description goes slightly further by framing it as an account-level setting ("sets whether this account receives weekly product notes in its inbox") and a mutation to omit-if-unchanged, but the added meaning over the schema is modest.

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 opening sentence gives a specific verb+resource: see which Cooper account this connection uses and whether the key is scoped to one inbox or a permission list. That is distinguishable from every sibling (billing_status, get_inbox, list_oauth_grants), none of which report the current connection's account/key identity.

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?

It states the triggering condition ("Use this when you need to see which Cooper account...") and an explicit exclusion plus alternative: "This tool does not mint or revoke keys. Use POST /api/v1/keys over HTTP so a key secret is not written into the chat transcript." That is when-to-use, when-not, and the alternative all in one place.

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

All Cooper Email 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