Skip to main content
Glama

agent-cold-email

by io.github.YS-projectcalc

list_messages

Read-only

List this tenant's system + operator messages (a retryable setup step, a credential going live, an operator notice), cursor-paginated. Unacked messages sort first (newest first within that group), then acked ones (also newest first). Returns { messages[], nextCursor }; each message: id, kind, severity ('info'|'action_required'|'operator_pending'|'terminal' — 'operator_pending' means the platform has stopped, nothing you change restarts it, and an operator clearing the blocker makes the SAME retry work, so keep the same inputs and idempotency key; 'terminal' means the platform has stopped and only a human can move it, so do NOT retry), body, actionHint (structured — e.g. which tool + idempotencyKey to retry with), source ('system'|'operator'), createdAt, readAt. readAt is set ONLY by an explicit ack_message call — LISTING messages never marks them, here or anywhere else, so calling this tool leaves every readAt exactly as it was. A null readAt therefore means 'not acked', which is NOT evidence the message was never seen: it may have been read and simply not acknowledged. Use ack_message to acknowledge one by id so it stops resurfacing. infrastructure_status also inlines the newest 5 unacked messages for a quick glance — this is the full paginated surface.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNo
cursorNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

  1. Added

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, and the description adds significant behavioral context: listing never marks messages as read, null readAt means not acked (not unseen), sorting order, and detailed severity semantics. No contradictions.

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 long but front-loaded with the main purpose. It efficiently packs sorting, return structure, and severity meanings. Slightly verbose but each sentence adds value. Could be tightened by separating severity details, but overall well-structured.

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?

Given no output schema, the description explains the full return structure and behavior. It covers sorting, severity meanings, and readAt semantics. The only gap is the missing explicit description of the limit parameter, but the schema covers its constraints. Mostly complete for a complex tool.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters2/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It mentions cursor-paginated and implies cursor usage via nextCursor, but does not explicitly describe the limit parameter or its constraints. The schema provides default/min/max but the description adds no extra meaning for limit.

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 it lists system and operator messages with cursor pagination. It distinguishes from sibling infrastructure_status by noting that tool only shows the newest 5 unacked messages, while this is the full paginated surface.

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 tells when to use this tool (to list all messages) versus ack_message (to acknowledge one by id) and mentions infrastructure_status as a quick alternative. Also provides behavioral guidance on how to handle different severity values, including retry advice for 'operator_pending' and warning against retries for 'terminal'.

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

All agent-cold-email 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

A4.4/5.0
Disambiguation4/5

Most tools have distinct purposes, but pause/pause_all and metrics/campaign_results/list_campaigns have overlapping scopes. Descriptions clarify the differences, so ambiguity is low.

Naming Consistency4/5

Uses snake_case with a mix of verb_noun (list_campaigns) and noun_verb (infrastructure_status), but patterns are predictable. Minor inconsistency between setup_infrastructure and infrastructure_status.

Tool Count4/5

25 tools is at the upper bound for a focused server, but the domain (cold email automation) justifies the number. Each tool covers a distinct aspect of the workflow.

Completeness4/5

Covers account management, campaigns, leads, threads, infrastructure, webhooks, and dashboards. Missing resume for paused campaigns and delete for campaigns, but core operations are present.

Resources