Skip to main content
Glama

Email Setup Checklist

send_setup_checklist

Emails the signed-in user the setup checklist: the rows still to do (the same rows get_setup_status and Home list) with a link to each, the rows skipped and done, and every connection waiting on the customer with its next step. Sends nothing when no row is to do and no connection is waiting. Related: get_setup_status, list_connections.

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": "send_setup_checklist"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
sentYes
messageYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already mark this as non-read-only, open-world, non-idempotent, and non-destructive. The description adds important behavioral context by stating that it emails the signed-in user, what the email contains, and that it sends nothing when there is no work or waiting connection.

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?

The description is front-loaded with the core action and then details the email contents, no-send condition, and related tools. It is somewhat dense in the first sentence but every clause carries useful information.

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?

Given the empty input schema, existing output schema, and annotations, the description is complete enough for correct invocation. It explains the trigger condition, email contents, and no-send behavior without needing to describe return values.

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?

The tool takes no parameters, so there are no parameter semantics to explain. The description appropriately focuses on what the email action does rather than documenting missing inputs.

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 states a specific verb and resource: it emails the signed-in user the setup checklist. It also clarifies the content, including rows still to do, skipped/done rows, and waiting connections, which distinguishes it from retrieval-oriented siblings like get_setup_status.

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 clear context for when the tool is useful and even states a no-send condition when no rows or connections need action. It names related tools, but it does not explicitly contrast this email action with get_setup_status or list_connections as alternatives.

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