Skip to main content
Glama

notify_me

Payments are not open yet. Ask for one email when they open (topic "payments_open"). With a key, the account owner's email is used; without a key, send email and accept_terms: true. Re-asking is safe (already: true, no duplicate). Optional intended_pack says which pack you plan to buy. One email, then the address is deleted 30 days later; the email has a one-click unsubscribe.

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": {
      "topic": "<topic>"
    },
    "name": "notify_me"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
emailNoOnly without a key: the address to notify
topicYes
accept_termsNoOnly without a key: accepts https://surgemesh.com/terms and https://surgemesh.com/privacy
intended_packNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Added

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden and does so well: it discloses idempotency (already: true, no duplicate), data retention (deleted after 30 days), unsubscribe behavior, and auth-dependent behavior (with a key vs without a key).

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?

Dense but front-loaded, with each sentence adding operational detail: purpose, topic, auth modes, idempotency, intended_pack, retention, and unsubscribe. No wasted text.

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?

No output schema or annotations exist, so the description must cover behavior and side effects; it does so by explaining auth modes, idempotency, retention, unsubscribe, and the already: true response. An agent has enough to call it correctly.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters5/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Although schema description coverage is only 50%, the description explains all four parameters: topic, conditional email and accept_terms when no key is present, and optional intended_pack. It adds meaningful conditional semantics beyond the schema.

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 action: request one email notification when payments open, using topic "payments_open". It is clear what the tool does, but it does not explicitly differentiate itself from siblings such as get_pricing or create_checkout_link.

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?

Explains the usage context (payments are not open yet) and the key-vs-no-key conditions, including that re-asking is safe. It lacks explicit when-not-to-use guidance or named alternatives, 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.

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources