oviond

Create automation

create_automation

Destructive

Create a new automation. Pick an existing email template + sender by id (from list_email_templates / list_email_senders), or pass template_id:"custom" together with a custom payload to save a new named template inline.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`day`	No	Day of send: weekday name (weekly, e.g. "monday") or day-of-month (monthly, e.g. "2")
`name`	Yes	Automation name
`hours`	Yes	Hour of send (e.g. "9")
`custom`	No	Required when template_id === "custom" — saved as a new named email template
`minutes`	Yes	Minute of send (e.g. "00")
`timezone`	Yes	IANA timezone (e.g. America/New_York)
`date_text`	Yes	Date-range preset label for the report
`frequency`	Yes	Send frequency
`parent_id`	Yes	Parent report ID this automation belongs to (from list_reports)
`sender_id`	Yes	Saved email sender id (from list_email_senders)
`recipients`	Yes	Recipient email addresses
`template_id`	Yes	Saved email template id (from list_email_templates), or the literal "custom" to save a new template from the `custom` payload
`time_format`	No	Meridiem for the send time

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`data`	No	The new automation — id, name, schedule, recipients and next_run_at. It is created active, so pause it if the user has not confirmed the first send.
`success`	Yes	True when the call succeeded.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed7 schema fields changedSep 25, 2026

removedInput schema / $schema

Removed value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"

addedInput schema / properties / custom / properties / button_text / description
```
Added value: +"CTA button label; omit for no button"
```
addedInput schema / properties / custom / properties / button_top / description
```
Added value: +"Place the button above the message instead of below it"
```

changedInput schema / properties / sender_id / description

Previous value: -"Saved email sender id"New value: +"Saved email sender id (from list_email_senders)"

changedInput schema / properties / template_id / description

Previous value: -"Saved email template id, or the literal \"custom\" to save a new template from the `custom` payload"New value: +"Saved email template id (from list_email_templates), or the literal \"custom\" to save a new template from the `custom` payload"

removedOutput schema / $schema

Removed value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"

changedOutput schema / properties / success / description

Previous value: -"True when the call succeeded. A failure comes back as an error result instead."New value: +"True when the call succeeded."

First observedSep 18, 2026

TDQS

A4.2/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=true, so the agent knows this is a mutating operation. The description adds the side effect that a custom payload is saved as a new named email template, which is useful behavioral context beyond the annotations. It does not cover rate limits or auth requirements, but with annotations present, the baseline is met and slightly exceeded.

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 sentences with no filler. The core purpose is front-loaded, and the two usage modes are presented in a compact, logical order. Every clause earns its place.

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?

Given 13 parameters, a nested object, and an output schema, the description covers the critical branching logic (custom vs. existing template) and references the required lookup tools. It does not explain the frequency/day/time combinations, but the schema and required fields carry that load. The presence of an output schema means return values are already specified. Missing a few edge-case clarifications, but adequate for a complex tool.

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 description coverage is 100%, so all parameters are documented in the schema. The description adds value by explaining the conditional relationship between template_id and the custom object, and by pointing to list_email_templates and list_email_senders as sources for valid IDs. This goes beyond the schema's individual field descriptions.

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 ('Create a new automation') and immediately clarifies the two supported modes (existing template+sender vs. inline custom template). This clearly distinguishes it from siblings like update_automation, archive_automation, or test_automation by stating exactly what it creates.

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?

The description gives explicit guidance on when to use each path: pick an existing template/sender by id from the listed sources, or pass template_id:'custom' with a custom payload. It does not state exclusions (e.g., when not to use this tool), but the creation intent is unambiguous given the sibling list. It could mention that updating an existing automation should use update_automation, but that's implied.

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

All oviond 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?