nofax

Send Nofax notification

nofax_notify

Send a one-way phone notification to inform a human, without waiting for a response or implying approval. Use for informational alerts that require no confirmation.

Instructions

Send a one-way phone notification. This tool is informational and does not create a human-response wait. Notification transport success never counts as approval.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "message": "<message>"
    },
    "name": "nofax_notify"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`title`	No	Optional notification title shown to the human; defaults to "Nofax".
`message`	Yes	Notification body shown to the human.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`status`	Yes	The notification transport call completed successfully; this is never approval.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed3 schema fields changedv0.2.7Sep 22, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / message / description

Added value: +"Notification body shown to the human."

addedInput schema / properties / title / description

Added value: +"Optional notification title shown to the human; defaults to \"Nofax\"."

changedOutput schema / (root)

Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "$schema": "https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema",
+  "additionalProperties": false,
+  "properties": {
+    "status": {
+      "const": "sent",
+      "description": "The notification transport call completed successfully; this is never approval.",
+      "type": "string"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "status"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}

First observedv0.2.1Sep 21, 2026

TDQS

A4.5/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Adds significant behavioral context beyond annotations: the one-way nature, absence of a human-response wait, and the critical warning that transport success never equals approval. This prevents a dangerous misinterpretation that annotations alone would not cover.

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, the purpose is front-loaded, and the essential non-approval caveat is included without any redundancy or fluff.

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

Completeness5/5

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

For a simple two-parameter tool with complete schema descriptions and an output schema present, the description covers all key semantic distinctions (one-way, no wait, no approval) needed for correct invocation. Nothing critical is missing.

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 coverage is 100% with clear descriptions for both 'message' and 'title'. The tool description adds no additional parameter-level meaning, so the baseline 3 applies as the schema already does the heavy lifting.

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 ('Send'), a resource ('one-way phone notification'), and explicitly says the tool is informational. This differentiates it from sibling request/approval tools by emphasizing the one-way nature and lack of a response wait.

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?

Clearly communicates when to use (informational, no response wait) and when not to rely on it ('never counts as approval'). It doesn't explicitly name alternative tools, but the when-not guidance is strong enough to route an agent correctly.

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

Deploy Server