Skip to main content
Glama

AffiliateSpy

by io.affiliatespy
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Approve autopilot action

approve_autopilot_action
Destructive

Approve a queued autopilot action and EXECUTE it. Depending on its type: a website batch enrols its sites and their cold first emails go out on the lane campaign's schedule; a sister-program intro, a welcome or a check-in is sent to that partner; a follow-up or a reply is sent into its thread; a campaign proposal reveals missing contacts (metered) and launches. The approval summary names what this one does, and an edit after it was shown needs a fresh approval. Same gated paths as the dashboard's approve button, including its edits: body replaces the drafted text, remove_ids drops sites from a website batch (they are flagged so autopilot never proposes them again). Guarded: without approval_token it returns {error:"approval_required", approval_token, summary} for the user to confirm; call again with the token. Every dashboard guardrail still applies: this is exactly what a user clicking the dashboard could do, no more.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
bodyNoYour edited text for a drafted email, sent instead of the draft.
action_idYesAn id from get_autopilot's queue.
remove_idsNoSites to drop from a website batch (ids from get_autopilot_action).
approval_tokenNoApproval token from a previous approval_required response, after the user said yes.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / body
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Your edited text for a drafted email, sent instead of the draft.",
+  "maxLength": 5000,
+  "minLength": 1,
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / remove_ids
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Sites to drop from a website batch (ids from get_autopilot_action).",
+  "items": {
+    "format": "uuid",
+    "pattern": "^([0-9a-fA-F]{8}-[0-9a-fA-F]{4}-[1-8][0-9a-fA-F]{3}-[89abAB][0-9a-fA-F]{3}-[0-9a-fA-F]{12}|00000000-0000-0000-0000-000000000000|ffffffff-ffff-ffff-ffff-ffffffffffff)$",
+    "type": "string"
+  },
+  "maxItems": 200,
+  "type": "array"
+}
  2. First observed

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Goes well beyond the annotations (destructiveHint=true, idempotentHint=false) by disclosing the metered contact reveal, that edits require a fresh approval, that remove_ids permanently flags sites so autopilot never re-proposes them, and that missing approval_token yields a structured error plus token. It also ties the guardrails to the dashboard's approve button, defining the blast radius.

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?

Front-loads the core action ('Approve a queued autopilot action and EXECUTE it') and then details side effects, edits, and the token guard in a logical order. It is dense and long, but nearly every clause carries operational information; the enumerated action-type list is the only mildly expendable part.

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?

For a destructive, non-idempotent mutation with no output schema, the description covers the trigger (queue ids), the guard flow (token), the side effects per action type, and the edit semantics. An agent has enough to call it correctly without opening another 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 coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3, but the description adds real meaning: body replaces the drafted text, remove_ids drops sites and flags them, and approval_token is explicitly framed as coming from a prior approval_required response after user confirmation. That is value beyond the 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?

States a specific verb ('Approve ... and EXECUTE') plus the resource (a queued autopilot action) and enumerates the concrete action types it can trigger, so the agent immediately understands what happens. The name alone would be ambiguous against hold/reject/get siblings, but the description removes that ambiguity.

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?

Gives clear context (action ids come from get_autopilot's queue) and the exact two-step token flow to use when the tool returns approval_required. It does not explicitly contrast with hold_autopilot_action or reject_autopilot_action, so the when-not guidance is left to inference.

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

All AffiliateSpy 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