Skip to main content
Glama

MisarMail MCP Server

by io.github.Misar-AI
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

create_campaign

Create a new email marketing campaign as a draft. Creating never sends or schedules anything — once the content and audience are confirmed, call send_campaign to send it now or schedule it for later.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
htmlNoHTML body content
nameYesInternal campaign name (not shown to recipients)
textNoPlain text body content
subjectYesSubject line recipients will see
reply_toNoReply-to address
from_nameYesSender display name (required)
from_emailYesVerified sender address
segment_idNoAudience segment to send to
template_idNoUse a saved template instead of inline HTML

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • removedInput schema / properties / scheduled_at
      Removed value: -{
-  "description": "ISO 8601 timestamp to schedule the send (omit to keep as draft)",
-  "type": "string"
-}
  2. Changed3 schema fields changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / from_name / description
      Previous value: -"Sender display name"New value: +"Sender display name (required)"
    • removedInput schema / properties / tags
      Removed value: -{
-  "description": "Contact tags to target",
-  "items": {
-    "type": "string"
-  },
-  "type": "array"
-}
    • changedInput schema / required
      Previous value: -[
-  "name",
-  "subject",
-  "from_email"
-]New value: +[
+  "name",
+  "subject",
+  "from_email",
+  "from_name"
+]
  3. First observed

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare a non-read-only, non-destructive, non-idempotent write. The description adds the key behavioral fact that creation never sends or schedules, which tempers the write semantics and explains the draft state. It does not cover duplicate handling or draft visibility beyond the internal/external name split in the schema.

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?

Two sentences, zero filler, front-loaded with the core action and immediately followed by the routing constraint. Every clause earns its place.

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?

For a 9-param creation tool with a fully documented schema and no output schema, the description covers purpose, draft semantics, and the send/schedule handoff. It omits what is returned on success and whether duplicate names are allowed, which are minor gaps given schema completeness.

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% with 9 params, so the schema already documents every field including html/text/template_id and segment_id. The description adds only the loose phrase 'content and audience' which gestures at body and segment params but no format or constraint detail. Baseline 3 is correct.

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 (create) and resource (email marketing campaign) and constrains the result to a draft, which sharply separates it from send_campaign. An agent can pick it over the sibling list without opening the schema.

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?

Explicitly names the follow-up alternative (send_campaign) and the condition that triggers it ('once the content and audience are confirmed'), plus states when this tool stops short. Nothing about routing 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 MisarMail MCP Server 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