Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Emailchaser

by com.emailchaser
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Copilot: plan a campaign

copilot_plan
Read-only

Given a company website, the honest AI SDR builds an ideal-customer-profile (ICP) and a suggested cold-email sequence. Read-only — creates nothing. Returns the ICP (personas, titles, industries, suggested Sales Navigator keywords) and a draft sequence you can review.

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": {
      "website": "<website>"
    },
    "name": "copilot_plan"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
contextNoOptional extra context, e.g. 'we sell to dental clinics in the US'
websiteYesThe company website to analyze, e.g. https://acme.com
descriptionNoOptional: what the company sells and to whom, in its own words. When given, the plan is built from it and the website is not read. Send it when copilot_plan answers that the website shows a placeholder page.

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. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / description
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Optional: what the company sells and to whom, in its own words. When given, the plan is built from it and the website is not read. Send it when copilot_plan answers that the website shows a placeholder page.",
+  "type": "string"
+}
  3. First observed

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so 'creates nothing' is largely reinforcement. The real added value is disclosing what the tool produces — personas, titles, industries, Sales Navigator keywords, and a draft sequence — which matters since there is no output schema. No mention of cost, latency, or rate limits for what is an open-world web-analysis operation.

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?

Three short sentences with the scope and the read-only guarantee front-loaded, followed by return contents. Wording like 'the honest AI SDR' is light marketing framing but does not obscure meaning.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

With no output schema and only three simple parameters, the description covers the essential contract: what goes in, that nothing is mutated, and roughly what comes back. The placeholder-page fallback is documented in the schema rather than the description, which is acceptable. Missing only non-functional details such as expected latency for the web analysis.

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 each parameter is already documented with examples, so the schema carries the semantic load. The description only implies the required website input ('Given a company website') and adds nothing about the optional 'context' or 'description' fields. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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?

States a specific verb and artifact: builds an ideal-customer-profile and a suggested cold-email sequence from a company website. An agent can tell this produces a plan rather than launching or mutating anything. It does not explicitly name how it differs from close siblings like create_icp or copilot_launch, so it stops short of a 5.

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 rather than stated: 'read-only — creates nothing' and 'a draft sequence you can review' suggest this is the pre-creation planning step, but no alternative tool is named and no exclusion is given. The description does route the agent for one edge case (supply 'description' when the website shows a placeholder), though that guidance lives in the schema, not the description.

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