Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Emailchaser

by com.emailchaser
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Lead Finder: stop an add

cancel_lead_finder_import
DestructiveIdempotent

Stops a running Lead Finder add. It reads canceled at once. A batch the worker is already writing is still added and charged; a batch still being screened or verified is dropped, though verification checks already made are billed. Credits held for the rest are released. Until finishedAt is set, added, creditsSpent and even status can still change: if that batch was the add's last, it ends completed or failed instead. People already added stay in the campaign. A stopped add cannot be resumed: adding the people again starts a new add. Stopping one that already finished changes nothing.

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": {
      "id": "<id>"
    },
    "name": "cancel_lead_finder_import"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYesThe import ID (importId from add_lead_finder_prospects or list_lead_finder_imports)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedInput schema / $schema
      Previous value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"New value: +"https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema"
  2. Added

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already flag destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=true, but the description adds substantial context: in-flight batches are still added and charged, screened/verified batches are dropped but completed verifications are billed, held credits are released, and fields may keep changing until finishedAt is set. This is exactly the partial-failure and billing behavior an agent needs before calling a destructive 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 description is front-loaded with the action, then the consequences in a logical order (immediate effect, partial-batch billing, eventual status, irreversibility). It is dense with specifics, though the final two sentences on non-resumability and no-op stopping slightly overlap in theme.

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 one-parameter destructive mutation with no output schema, the description covers what is destroyed, what is still charged, how status evolves, and the irreversibility constraint. An agent has enough to call it correctly and to warn a user about costs.

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 description coverage is 100%, and the schema already explains that id is the importId from add_lead_finder_prospects or list_lead_finder_imports. The prose adds no further meaning about the parameter, which is acceptable given the fully documented single parameter, but it is the baseline rather than added value.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Stops a running Lead Finder add.' Combined with the title and the id parameter documented as an import ID, an agent can immediately distinguish this from sibling tools like cancel_email_verification_job or list_lead_finder_imports.

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 context for when this applies (a running add) and an explicit no-op case: 'Stopping one that already finished changes nothing.' It also warns that a stopped add cannot be resumed. It lacks an explicit pointer to an alternative tool for inspecting state, but the decision conditions are otherwise clear.

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

All Emailchaser 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