Sendblox

Get Reply

get_reply

Read-onlyIdempotent

APP: Reads one stored reply. Classification is returned only if already stored.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "get_reply"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`id`	No
`replyId`	No

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`jobId`	No
`result`	Yes
`status`	Yes
`summary`	No
`blockers`	Yes
`warnings`	Yes
`readiness`	No
`requestId`	Yes
`retryable`	No
`nextPossibleActions`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedOct 30, 2026

TDQS

C2.9/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive and closed-world, so the safety profile is covered. The one genuinely additive sentence is that classification is returned only if already stored — a useful conditional-return detail that isn't in the annotations.

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?

Two short sentences with no filler and the core action front-loaded. It is efficient, though the "APP:" tag is wasted characters.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness2/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

An output schema exists, so return documentation isn't required, but the central ambiguity — two optional identifier parameters with no explanation — is left entirely unaddressed. For a lookup tool, identifier semantics are the one thing the description must supply.

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% and both `id` and `replyId` are optional and undocumented, yet the description says nothing about either. It never resolves which identifier selects the reply or what happens if both or neither are provided, so the agent must guess.

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?

"Reads one stored reply" gives a specific verb and resource and implicitly distinguishes this from the sibling list_replies. The opaque "APP:" prefix adds no meaning and slightly muddies an otherwise clear statement.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

No statement of when to use this versus list_replies or any other sibling; the singular "one stored reply" only implies single-item retrieval. There is no guidance on prerequisites such as whether the reply must already exist or which identifier to supply.

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

All Sendblox 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?