Skip to main content
Glama

email-spam-tester

by io.github.serg-tanichev
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Read the received message

get_message_source
Read-onlyIdempotent

The message exactly as it was received: headers, both bodies, source.

Useful when a finding points at a header and the agent needs to see what it
actually sent rather than what it believes it sent. The message is kept
for an hour after it arrives and then deleted; within that hour anyone
with the slug can read it. After that only the report remains.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
slugYesThe slug of a test whose message has already arrived.

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / slug / description
      Previous value: -"The slug of a test or a series letter whose message has already arrived."New value: +"The slug of a test whose message has already arrived."
  2. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / slug / description
      Previous value: -"The slug of a test whose message has already arrived."New value: +"The slug of a test or a series letter whose message has already arrived."
  3. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / slug / description
      Added value: +"The slug of a test whose message has already arrived."
  4. First observed

TDQS

A4.1/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already establish readOnly/idempotent/non-destructive, and the description adds genuinely new lifecycle facts: one-hour retention, deletion afterward, and that anyone holding the slug can read it during that window. That is real context beyond the structured fields, though nothing is said about size limits or what the output looks like.

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?

Three tight sentences, front-loaded with what the tool returns, then the use case, then the retention constraint. No filler.

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?

Output schema exists so return shape need not be described; the description still covers the critical behavioral constraint (one-hour window) an agent needs before calling. Nothing material 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 coverage is 100% and the single slug parameter is documented as 'a test whose message has already arrived'; the description adds no format or syntax detail beyond that. Baseline 3 is appropriate when the schema carries the parameter meaning.

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?

Names the verb+resource precisely and enumerates what the payload contains (headers, both bodies, source). It implicitly separates itself from the report sibling ('after that only the report remains') but never names get_report explicitly, so sibling differentiation is only implied.

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 a concrete trigger: when a finding points at a header and the agent needs the actual sent bytes rather than its assumption. Strong context, but no explicit 'do not use for X' or named alternative tool.

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

All email-spam-tester 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