Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

craft-content-mcp

by io.github.shashwatgtm
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Newsletter Builder

newsletter_builder
Read-only

Helps you decide what goes in a newsletter issue and which subject line to test, from your topic and the action you want readers to take. Optional key points, audience segment, newsletter type, tone, earlier topics and your product fit it to the reader. Returns a first draft with subject line and preview, an opening, a short section for each key point, your call to action as the button, A/B subject lines, other opening hooks and sector notes. It adds no statistic or customer story and says what it did not get. Ask whether written customer approval covers the exact material and intended use.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
toneNoThe writing tone
topicYesThe main topic or theme of the newsletter
cta_goalYesThe action readers should take, in your own words (for example 'register for the webinar', 'book a call', 'read the guide'); it becomes the button
key_pointsNoOptional: key points to cover, one per line, per semicolon or comma-separated. If not provided, points are suggested from the topic and newsletter type
your_sectorNoOptional: your company's own industry (not your customers'). When given, it decides the sector notes; when left out, the tool reads it from your words and stays neutral if they are unclear.
your_productNoOptional: your product or service name, used in the answer. Without it the answer says so and shows a placeholder.
newsletter_typeNoThe kind of newsletter
previous_topicsNoOptional: recent newsletter topics, to avoid repetition and suggest connections
audience_segmentNoWho the newsletter is for; sets tone and depth
publication_approvalNoOptional confirmed written approval for this exact customer name, figures, quote and intended use. Ask before publication. A draft cannot grant customer permission.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / publication_approval
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Optional confirmed written approval for this exact customer name, figures, quote and intended use. Ask before publication. A draft cannot grant customer permission.",
+  "enum": [
+    "approved",
+    "not_approved",
+    "unknown"
+  ],
+  "type": "string"
+}
  2. Changed9 schema fields changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / audience_segment / description
      Previous value: -"Audience segment affects tone and depth"New value: +"Who the newsletter is for; sets tone and depth"
    • changedInput schema / properties / cta_goal / description
      Previous value: -"What action should readers take? (e.g., 'sign up for webinar', 'try feature', 'read blog')"New value: +"The action readers should take, in your own words (for example 'register for the webinar', 'book a call', 'read the guide'); it becomes the button"
    • changedInput schema / properties / key_points / description
      Previous value: -"OPTIONAL: Key points to cover (comma-separated). If not provided, the tool suggests 5 points based on the topic and newsletter type"New value: +"Optional: key points to cover, one per line, per semicolon or comma-separated. If not provided, points are suggested from the topic and newsletter type"
    • changedInput schema / properties / newsletter_type / description
      Previous value: -"Type of newsletter"New value: +"The kind of newsletter"
    • changedInput schema / properties / previous_topics / description
      Previous value: -"Optional: Recent newsletter topics to avoid repetition and suggest connections"New value: +"Optional: recent newsletter topics, to avoid repetition and suggest connections"
    • changedInput schema / properties / tone / description
      Previous value: -"Writing tone"New value: +"The writing tone"
    • changedInput schema / properties / topic / description
      Previous value: -"Main topic/theme of the newsletter"New value: +"The main topic or theme of the newsletter"
    • addedInput schema / properties / your_product
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Optional: your product or service name, used in the answer. Without it the answer says so and shows a placeholder.",
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / your_sector
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Optional: your company's own industry (not your customers'). When given, it decides the sector notes; when left out, the tool reads it from your words and stays neutral if they are unclear.",
+  "enum": [
+    "logistics_tech",
+    "fintech",
+    "saas",
+    "vertical_saas",
+    "ai_native",
+    "ites",
+    "telecom",
+    "software",
+    "cybersecurity",
+    "other"
+  ],
+  "type": "string"
+}
  3. First observed

TDQS

A4.1/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already mark this as a safe read-only, closed-world operation, and the description adds substantial behavior beyond that: the exact shape of the returned draft (subject line and preview, opening, per-key-point sections, CTA button, A/B subject lines, alternate hooks, sector notes). It also discloses a meaningful limitation — it adds no statistic or customer story and reports what it did not receive — which tells the agent how to handle thin inputs and what to verify before publishing.

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?

It is dense but front-loaded, leading with what the tool decides and who it is for before listing the returned artifact. Nearly every clause carries information, though the final sentence about asking whether written customer approval covers the material is vague about who is asking and of whom, which weakens the close.

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 ten-parameter generation tool with no output schema, the description covers inputs, the full return structure and a publication-safety caveat, so an agent can call it and interpret the result correctly. Minor gaps remain around draft length, language, and whether output is persisted anywhere, but nothing essential to invocation 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% and five parameters carry enums, so the schema already explains tone, sector, newsletter type, audience and approval states. The description's prose restates the same optional inputs (key points, audience segment, newsletter type, tone, earlier topics, product) without adding syntax, defaults or interactions the schema does not already convey. Baseline 3 is appropriate when the schema does the heavy lifting.

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?

The description names a specific resource and deliverable: it decides what goes into a newsletter issue and which subject line to test, and returns a full draft. It is clearly a newsletter-drafting tool rather than a general rewriter, which separates it from content_repurposer or craft_content_improver. It stops short of naming any sibling explicitly, so differentiation is inferred from the newsletter framing.

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?

It states the inputs that drive the tool (your topic and the action you want readers to take) and adds a real usage caveat about confirming written customer approval for names, figures, quotes and intended use. It gives no explicit exclusions or 'use X instead when...' routing against the other seven content-generation siblings, so the agent must infer boundaries.

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

All craft-content-mcp 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