shiply

Broadcast to confirmed subscribers

send_broadcast

Send a campaign to this test's confirmed (double-opt-in) subscribers — the "we're live" email. An unsubscribe link is added automatically. Fails if there are no confirmed subscribers yet.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`html`	Yes	email HTML body (unsubscribe link added automatically)
`text`	No	plain-text fallback body
`testId`	Yes	demand test id whose confirmed subscribers to email
`subject`	Yes	email subject line

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

Changed5 schema fields changedJun 23, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / html / description

Added value: +"email HTML body (unsubscribe link added automatically)"

addedInput schema / properties / subject / description
```
Added value: +"email subject line"
```

addedInput schema / properties / testId / description

Added value: +"demand test id whose confirmed subscribers to email"

addedInput schema / properties / text / description
```
Added value: +"plain-text fallback body"
```

changedOutput schema / (root)

Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "$schema": "http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#",
+  "additionalProperties": false,
+  "properties": {
+    "result": {}
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "result"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}

First observedJun 23, 2026

TDQS

A4.2/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations indicate openWorldHint (side effects) and non-idempotent, but the description adds that an unsubscribe link is automatically added and it fails if there are no confirmed subscribers. These are beyond what annotations provide, though it could mention rate limiting or confirmation delivery.

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?

Two concise sentences: first defines purpose and recipient, second adds two critical behavioral details. No unnecessary words or repetition. Front-loaded and efficient.

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?

Given an output schema exists, the description covers core behavior (send to confirmed subscribers, auto-unsubscribe, failure condition). It could mention that it sends to all confirmed subscribers of the test, but overall it's complete for a campaign tool.

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?

With 100% schema description coverage, the baseline is 3. The description adds value by linking parameters to the campaign context (e.g., html body with auto-unsubscribe). It reinforces that subject and html are for the email body and that testId identifies the test, but doesn't add syntax beyond 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 it sends a campaign to confirmed (double-opt-in) subscribers of a test, using the phrase 'we're live' email. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like send_email and send_mailbox_broadcast by specifying the recipient audience and automatic unsubscribe addition.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

The description provides context that the tool is for sending to confirmed subscribers and fails if none exist, but it does not explicitly compare alternatives or state when not to use it. No mention of alternatives or when-to-use vs. other send tools.

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

All shiply tools Inspect

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

B3.4/5.0

Disambiguation2/5

Many tools have overlapping purposes (e.g., add_domain, add_subdomain, add_custom_domain, add_sending_domain) or similar names like check_domain and check_custom_domain, which can confuse an agent. While descriptions help, the sheer number of closely related tools makes it difficult to consistently select the correct one.

Naming Consistency3/5

Most tools follow a verb_noun pattern, but there are exceptions like 'read_thread' (instead of get_thread) and 'mark_thread_read' (verb_noun_verb). Prefixes like 'data_' are used inconsistently with other tools, but overall the naming is still readable.

Tool Count1/5

With 103 tools, the server is extremely bloated. Even for a comprehensive platform, this count overwhelms any agent and makes the tool surface difficult to navigate. Many tools could be merged or are too granular.

Completeness4/5

The toolset covers a wide range of operations across sites, domains, email, marketplace, projects, contracts, and functions. While some updates (e.g., general contract editing) are missing, the surface is mostly comprehensive for the domain.

Resources

Need Help?