MightyAutomation

Send an email

send_email

Destructive

Send an email to a contact from the workspace sender identity and log it on the contact timeline. Fails safely if the contact is marked do-not-contact. Confirm the subject/body with the member before sending — this is a real outbound email.

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": {
      "contact_id": "<contact_id>",
      "subject": "<subject>",
      "body": "<body>"
    },
    "name": "send_email"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`cc`	No	Optional CC address.
`bcc`	No	Optional BCC address.
`body`	Yes	Plain-text email body.
`subject`	Yes	Subject line.
`contact_id`	Yes	The contact id (uuid) from find_contact / list_contacts / search_leads.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description
`ok`	No
`sent`	No
`error`	No	Present only when ok is false.
`status`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedOct 23, 2026

TDQS

A4.2/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already flag destructiveHint, openWorldHint, and non-idempotency, but the description adds real context beyond them: that this is a real outbound email requiring human confirmation, that the send is logged on the contact timeline, and that do-not-contact contacts cause a safe failure. It stops short of covering delivery failure modes or rate limits.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Two tight sentences with no filler; the action and its guardrail (do-not-contact) come before the confirmation requirement. Every clause carries operational information.

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?

An output schema exists, so return-shape explanation is unnecessary, and the safety profile is well covered. What's missing is edge-case guidance such as behavior for invalid contact_id or whether the send is retried on failure — minor for a tool this well annotated.

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 contact_id, subject, body, cc, and bcc are already documented in the schema. The description only implies that subject and body are the fields to confirm, adding no syntax or formatting detail beyond the schema — the baseline 3 applies.

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 verb and resource ('Send an email to a contact') plus scope details: workspace sender identity, timeline logging, and do-not-contact guard. This clearly separates it from siblings like add_note or add_tag, which write to the contact but do not send outbound mail.

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?

Gives explicit preconditions and a behavioral rule: confirm subject/body with the member before sending, and it fails safely for do-not-contact contacts. It doesn't name alternatives (e.g., use add_note for internal-only records), so it falls short of a 5.

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

All MightyAutomation 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.

Resources

Need Help?