Skip to main content
Glama

lob

by io.usefulapi

Save an address record

lob_create_address
Destructive

Create a reusable saved address record (does NOT send any mail). Returns an address id (adr_…) usable as to/from in mail tools. Lob API: POST /v1/addresses.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameNoRecipient name (required unless `company` is set).
companyNo
address_zipNoZIP / postal code.
descriptionNoInternal label for this address.
address_cityNo
address_line1YesPrimary street address.
address_line2NoUnit/suite/apt.
address_stateNo2-letter state/province code.
address_countryNo2-letter ISO country code. Defaults to US.

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations include destructiveHint=true, but the description does not elaborate on this. It adds that the tool returns an address ID and references the API endpoint, which is helpful but does not substantially expand beyond annotations.

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 consists of two concise sentences that front-load the key purpose and clarification. Every word adds value with no redundancy.

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 tool with 9 parameters and no output schema, the description covers the core function, side effects (no mail sent), and return format. It is mostly complete, though could mention idempotency or prerequisites.

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 78%, and the description does not add additional meaning for parameters. The description mentions the return value but not parameter specifics, so it provides minimal extra value over the schema.

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 description clearly states 'Create a reusable saved address record' and explicitly clarifies it does not send mail. It distinguishes from sibling tools like lob_create_letter by specifying the address is used as to/from in mail tools.

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 explains the tool is for creating saved addresses without sending mail, and that the returned ID is usable in mail tools. This provides clear context but does not explicitly state when not to use it or list alternatives.

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

All lob toolsInspect
Try in Browser
RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A3.9/5.0
Disambiguation5/5

Every tool targets a distinct resource and action, with clear verb-noun names like create_address and verify_us_address. There is no overlapping functionality, and even similar operations (e.g., list for different resources) are distinct.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tools share the 'lob_' prefix and follow a consistent verb_noun pattern (e.g., create_postcard, list_letters, verify_intl_address). Multi-word nouns use underscores, maintaining uniformity throughout.

Tool Count5/5

With 18 tools, the set covers the primary mail fulfillment operations—address management, postcards, letters, checks, self-mailers, and address verification—without feeling bloated or sparse. The count is well-suited to the domain.

Completeness2/5

The tool set has notable gaps: no create_check or create_self_mailer, no cancel for letters or checks despite being referenced, no update/delete for addresses, and only list for templates. These missing operations will likely cause agent failures in common workflows.

Resources