Eversports Studio Manager by Cotlet

Configure email journeys in Eversports Studio Manager

eversports_studio_manager_configure_email_journeys

Read-onlyIdempotent

Configure email journeys in the user's own Eversports Studio Manager account from ChatGPT, Claude or any AI agent. Returns how to do it in Eversports Studio Manager step by step (screens, buttons, fields) and opens nothing by itself; then do it with the cotlet_browser_* tools in the user's Eversports Studio Manager Cloud Browser. Eversports Studio Manager's official API: Eversports Studio Manager has an official Provider API, but it is read-only: it reads eight areas (business and venues, schedules, booking details, teachers, products, customers, customer products, and attendance and court bookings) and cannot add, change or cancel anything.

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": "eversports_studio_manager_configure_email_journeys"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedNov 12, 2026

TDQS

A4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, and the description is consistent with them while adding real value beyond the structured data: it specifies that the return payload is procedural guidance (screens, buttons, fields) and that no action or UI state is changed. The note that the official Provider API is read-only and covers only eight read areas explains why browser automation is required, which is useful behavioral context.

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 core purpose and the browser-handoff instruction are front-loaded in the first two sentences. The closing paragraph on the Provider API is longer than necessary and partly tangential, but it does earn its place by justifying the browser-based path.

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 input parameters and no output schema, the description correctly spends its words explaining what the tool returns (step-by-step instructions) and what it does not do. It is nearly complete; minor gaps remain around preconditions in the user's account and whether the returned guidance is scoped or versioned.

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 zero parameters, so the baseline of 4 applies; there is nothing for the description to disambiguate at the argument level.

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?

The first sentence names a specific verb and resource ('Configure email journeys') and immediately disambiguates the nature of the tool: it returns instructions rather than performing the action. It does not explicitly contrast itself with sibling configure_* tools, so it falls just short of the sibling-differentiation bar for a 5.

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 lays out a clear two-step workflow: call this tool to get step-by-step screens/buttons/fields, then execute with the cotlet_browser_* tools in the Cloud Browser. It clearly states what this tool does not do ('opens nothing by itself'), which functions as an implicit exclusion, but there is no explicit when-not or prerequisite guidance (e.g. required permissions or account state).

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

All Eversports Studio Manager by Cotlet 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?