Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
addy-mcp

addy-mcp

by Former-Stranger
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Remote

get_failed_delivery

Read-only

Retrieve details for a failed delivery by its UUID, including sender, alias, and bounce reason, to diagnose why an email was not delivered.

Instructions

Get details of a failed delivery (sender, alias, bounce reason, ...).

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": {
      "failed_delivery_id": "<failed_delivery_id>"
    },
    "name": "get_failed_delivery"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
failed_delivery_idYesThe id (UUID) of the item

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.2

TDQS

B3.2/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered externally. The description adds that bounce reason and sender/alias data are surfaced, but says nothing about behavior when the id is unknown, retention windows, or data freshness.

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 front-loaded sentence with no wasted wording; the parenthetical field list is informative. The trailing ellipsis is slightly loose but costs little.

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 simple one-parameter read tool with an output schema absent, the description usefully signals the shape of the returned record (sender, alias, bounce reason). Given annotations cover safety and the schema covers the id, this is close to complete, with only edge-case behavior left unstated.

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 100%, and the single failed_delivery_id parameter is fully documented as a UUID in the schema. The description adds no additional meaning about the identifier beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 ('Get details of a failed delivery') and enumerates the kinds of detail returned (sender, alias, bounce reason), so the agent knows this is a single-item detail lookup rather than a listing. It does not explicitly distinguish itself from siblings such as list_failed_deliveries or download_failed_delivery, which is why it falls short of a 5.

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?

There is no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance, and no alternatives are named. The 'get ... details' phrasing only weakly implies retrieval of a single record by id versus the sibling listing tool.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools