Nextmail

Get sending analytics

getSendingAnalytics

Read-only

What became of the mail this workspace sent, as the Analytics page shows it: how many went out over a window and how many were delivered, failed, bounced or complained about, per day, with the statuses, where they came from, the addresses they went out as and the addresses suppressed. days defaults to 30, minutes wins over days, and since and until, ISO 8601 instants at most 365 days apart, set the window outright. address narrows it to the mail sent from one address, recipient to the mail that went to one address, counting only its delivery there, and tag to the mail sent with a tag: name for any value, name:value for one.

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": "getSendingAnalytics"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`tag`	No
`days`	No
`grain`	No
`since`	No
`until`	No
`address`	No
`minutes`	No
`recipient`	No
`offsetMinutes`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedOct 25, 2026

TDQS

A3.8/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, openWorldHint=false, so safety is covered. The description adds real behavior: the 30-day default, the minutes-over-days precedence, the 365-day maximum window, and a description of the returned content since no output schema exists. This is solid added context 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.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

One dense paragraph, front-loaded with the purpose before window and filter semantics. Nearly every clause carries information, though the run-on structure makes it slightly harder to scan than a segmented layout would.

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?

With no output schema and 0% schema coverage across nine parameters, the description does substantial work: purpose, return content, window rules, and filter semantics. The unmentioned grain and offsetMinutes parameters are the main remaining gap for correct invocation.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must carry parameter meaning, and it does for days, minutes, since, until, address, recipient, and tag (including the name vs name:value syntax). It omits any explanation of grain (minute/hour/day) and offsetMinutes, leaving two of nine parameters undocumented, which keeps it from a 5.

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?

States a specific verb and resource with real scope: sent mail outcomes (delivered, failed, bounced, complained), per-day, by source, sending address, and suppression. The 'as the Analytics page shows it' framing anchors it to a real view. It does not name distinguishing alternatives from analytics-adjacent siblings like getEngagementStats, getEmailTracking, or getBroadcastAnalytics, so a 4 rather than 5.

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?

It gives clear guidance on choosing a window (days defaults to 30, minutes wins over days, since/until set the window outright), which is genuinely useful. However, it never says when to reach for this tool versus the many other analytics siblings, so it only implicitly covers tool selection.

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

All Nextmail tools Inspect

Try in Browser

Claude Code, inside the Godot 4 editorFlockbay puts an AI agent in the real Godot 4 editor: it writes GDScript, runs your game and fixes what breaks. Free, or bring your own Claude Code or Codex.flockbay.comAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.