email-spam-tester

get_test_address

Reserve a single-use address to send a draft message to.

Returns the address and the URL its report will appear at. The address
accepts exactly one message and expires after an hour.

lang is the language the fix plan will be written in, as an ISO code
("de", "pt-BR"). Set it to the language the person you are working for
reads: it decides the plan and the per-check findings on the page they
open, and it has to be decided now because the message arrives minutes
later over SMTP, which carries no hint of who is waiting for it. Unknown
codes fall back to English rather than failing.

What you get back from wait_for_report stays English whatever you set: the
check lines it quotes come from the report's `summary` field, which is
English by design so a script reading it reads the same words every time.
The person following report_url sees their own language.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`lang`	No		en

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedSep 17, 2026

TDQS

A4.8/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden and exceeds it: exactly one message, one-hour expiry, unknown-language fallback to English, and the English-vs-localized report distinction are all disclosed. This gives the agent reliable expectations for side effects and edge cases.

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?

The description is detailed but front-loaded and every sentence earns its place. The first sentence states the purpose, the second covers outputs and constraints, and the rest explains the parameter and the downstream language behavior without repetition.

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 single-parameter, no-annotation tool, this is complete: it explains the return value, lifetime, constraints, parameter semantics, edge-case behavior, and downstream interaction with wait_for_report. Nothing needed for correct invocation is missing.

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

Parameters5/5

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

Schema description coverage is 0%, but the description fully compensates for the lang parameter: meaning, ISO code examples, why it must be chosen now, and the fallback behavior for unknown codes. The agent knows both how to set it and what happens if it is wrong.

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 first sentence states a specific verb and resource: 'Reserve a single-use address to send a draft message to,' followed by what is returned. This clearly separates it from the sibling tools, which deal with messages, reports, and waiting.

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?

The description gives clear usage context: set lang to the language the recipient reads, decide it now, and expect a time-limited address. It mentions wait_for_report's behavior downstream but does not explicitly state when to prefer this tool over each sibling or when not to use it.

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 tools Inspect

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.