Skip to main content
Glama

AfterLaunch: the agentic growth marketing engine

by io.afterlaunch

set_output_status

Resolve one drafted marketing output in the founder's review queue (from list_outputs): action 'ship' marks it done or posted WITHOUT publishing anywhere, action 'skip' dismisses it. WHEN: call 'ship' the moment the founder confirms the content is actually out, with their go and never on your own; call 'skip' when they decide against it. Posting is the human's decision; reporting the outcome is yours, and it is not optional, because an unreported result leaves the record blind to what the work earned. Report only what is true: a draft you have written is not a draft that went out. This never posts to a channel: real publishing is approve_output (egress scope, human-approved). Free; requires the 'act' scope and Founder tier.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
actionYes'ship' resolves it as done / posted without publishing; 'skip' dismisses it.
output_idYesOutput id (uuid), from list_outputs.

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the annotations (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false), the description discloses that this never actually posts to a channel, that reporting the outcome is mandatory, and that it requires 'act' scope and Founder tier. These behavioral traits are not captured in annotations and add crucial context for an agent.

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 purpose and then expands with usage and transparency details. It is slightly verbose but every sentence adds meaningful value, with no filler. Could be trimmed slightly, but structure is logical.

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 tool's simplicity (2 params, no output schema), the description is fully complete: it explains the action, when to use each option, the absolute prohibition on self-initiated shipping, the requirement to report true outcomes, permission/scope needs, and the distinction from approve_output. Nothing essential 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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents both parameters thoroughly. The description reinforces the meaning of action values and ties output_id to list_outputs, but does not add new semantic details beyond what the schema provides. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 clearly states the verb 'Resolve' and the resource 'drafted marketing output in the founder's review queue', and explicitly contrasts with sibling approve_output for publishing. It distinguishes the two actions 'ship' and 'skip', making the purpose unmistakable.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description provides explicit WHEN guidance: call 'ship' only when the founder confirms with their go, never on your own; call 'skip' when they decide against it. It also names the alternative for real publishing (approve_output), offering strong usage direction.

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

All AfterLaunch: the agentic growth marketing engine toolsInspect
Try in Browser
RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A3.9/5.0
Disambiguation4/5

Most tools follow a clear action+resource pattern (get_, list_, set_, ship_, etc.) with distinct purposes. A few boundaries could cause confusion, such as get_move vs get_output (both return drafts) and ship_move vs set_output_status (both mark things shipped), though descriptions mitigate this sufficiently.

Naming Consistency4/5

The overwhelming majority use consistent snake_case verb_noun naming (list_feed, ship_move, get_visibility). The only outlier is 'whoami', a common convention but not verb_noun; otherwise the pattern is highly predictable.

Tool Count2/5

At 41 tools, the surface is well over the 25-tool threshold for 'too many'. While the domain is broad, this volume places significant cognitive load on agents and suggests some consolidation or modularization could help.

Completeness3/5

Core workflows for moves and outputs are covered (create/list/get/update/ship/skip/undo). However, the tool descriptions reference 'approve_output' as the publishing action, yet that tool is absent from the list, leaving a dead end for channel distribution. There are also no tools for editing competitors or managing Memory pages beyond recording insights.

Resources