Meisa

Update Sequence

meisa_update_sequence

Idempotent

Update a sequence's name, description, or settings (PATCH-style; only the fields you pass change). settings are merged, so you can tweak one key (e.g. send window) without resending the whole object. To change status, use meisa_activate_sequence or meisa_pause_sequence (they enforce the state rules).

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`name`	No	New sequence name.
`settings`	No	Settings to merge in, e.g. {"timezone": "America/New_York", "send_window_start": "09:00", "send_window_end": "17:00", "send_on_weekends": false}.
`description`	No	New internal description.
`sequence_id`	Yes	UUID of the sequence to edit.
`track_opens`	No	Add the open-tracking pixel. Default true. Set false to skip it (open stats are not recorded).
`track_clicks`	No	Wrap links in click-tracking redirects. Default true. Set false to send links straight to the destination (can help inbox placement; click stats are not recorded).
`email_category`	No	Subscription category, so recipients can unsubscribe from this kind of email and keep the rest: 'onboarding' (tips and onboarding), 'product_updates', 'promotions' (offers and discounts), 'newsletter'. Empty string = automatic: the template's category decides (promotional -> promotions, announcement -> product_updates, newsletter -> newsletter), otherwise sequences and triggers use 'onboarding' and broadcasts use 'product_updates'. Ignored on triggers with override_unsubscribe (those are transactional and always send).

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed2 schema fields changedOct 12, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / track_clicks

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Wrap links in click-tracking redirects. Default true. Set false to send links straight to the destination (can help inbox placement; click stats are not recorded).",
+  "type": "boolean"
+}

addedInput schema / properties / track_opens

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Add the open-tracking pixel. Default true. Set false to skip it (open stats are not recorded).",
+  "type": "boolean"
+}

First observedOct 5, 2026

TDQS

A4.6/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and the description is consistent with them. Beyond the annotations it discloses PATCH semantics (only passed fields change) and that settings are deep-merged so a single key can be tweaked without resending the whole object — genuinely useful behavioral context. It stops short of stating authorization requirements or what an update does to already-enrolled contacts.

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 the editable fields, then update semantics, then the alternative-tool routing. Every clause carries information; nothing is repeated from the schema or the title.

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 7-parameter mutation tool with a nested object, the description covers the essentials: what is editable, how merging works, and where status changes belong. With no output schema it would be marginally better to say what the call returns (e.g. the updated sequence), but that is a minor gap.

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

Parameters4/5

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

Schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3, but the description adds real semantics the schema does not: partial-update/PATCH behavior and merge (not replace) semantics for the nested settings object, with a concrete send-window example. That clarifies the riskiest parameter beyond its schema text.

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 and resource ('Update a sequence') and enumerates exactly what is editable: name, description, settings. It also names the sibling tools that own status changes, so the agent can distinguish it from meisa_activate_sequence/meisa_pause_sequence without opening either 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?

Explicit routing: use this tool for name/description/settings edits, and use meisa_activate_sequence or meisa_pause_sequence 'to change status' because those 'enforce the state rules.' That is a when-to-use plus a when-not-to-use with named alternatives, which is the top of the scale.

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

All Meisa 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.

Resources

Need Help?