Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Selenios

by com.selenios.back
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

List email templates

list_contact_templates
Read-onlyIdempotent

List the active email templates available to the organization for messaging candidates (its own and the global ones), without their body. Specialized system templates (scheduling) are not included. Each template has an id and a name that identify it when sending an email.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "list_contact_templates"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
stageTypeNoFilter by the pipeline stage type the template is tagged for; generic (untagged) templates are always included

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, non-destructive and closed-world, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuinely non-obvious behavior: bodies are omitted, scheduling/system templates are excluded, and generic untagged templates are always returned as a filter side effect.

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?

Three tight sentences, front-loaded with what is listed and what is omitted, then the exclusion of system templates, then the return identity fields. Nothing is redundant with the title and every sentence carries 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?

With no output schema, the description usefully tells the agent to expect id and name per template, and it handles the main surprise (no body). Minor gaps remain — result ordering or size limits are unmentioned — but nothing needed to call it correctly is missing.

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% and the single stageType parameter is well documented in the schema, including the always-included generic case. The description adds no filter semantics of its own, so the baseline of 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 ('List the active email templates available to the organization'), scopes the result set to the org's own plus global templates, and explicitly notes that bodies are excluded. An agent immediately knows this is a lightweight enumeration of templates, not a content fetch.

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?

Usage context is clear: the final sentence ties the tool to sending candidate email, implying it is the lookup step before send_candidate_email. It does not explicitly name that sibling or state when-not-to-use, but for a read-only lister with no close competitors the context is sufficient.

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

All Selenios 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