Skip to main content
Glama
enesjakozh
Hawstein

MCP Server Resend

by Hawstein
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Hybrid

MCPサーバー再送信

Resend API用のMCPサーバー。LLMがメールの作成と送信を代行します。

環境変数

  • RESEND_API_KEY (文字列、必須): 再送信APIキー

  • SENDER_EMAIL_ADDRESS (文字列、必須): 送信者のメールアドレス

  • REPLY_TO_EMAIL_ADDRESSES (文字列、オプション): 返信先のメールアドレスのカンマ区切りリスト

Related MCP server: IMAP MCP Server

利用可能なツール

  • send_email - Resend API を使用してメールを送信する

    • 入力:

      • to (文字列): 受信者のメールアドレス

      • subject (文字列): メールの件名

      • content (文字列): プレーンテキストのメールコンテンツ

      • from (文字列、オプション): 送信者のメールアドレス (指定されていない場合は SENDER_EMAIL_ADDRESS を使用)

      • replyTo (配列、オプション): 返信先のメールアドレス (指定されていない場合は REPLY_TO_EMAIL_ADDRESSES を使用)

      • scheduledAt (文字列、オプション): スケジュールされたメール配信時刻

      • attachments （配列、オプション）：添付ファイルのリスト。各添付ファイルには次のものが必要です。

        • filename (文字列): 添付ファイルの名前

        • localPath (文字列): ユーザーのコンピュータ上のローカル ファイルへの絶対パス (remoteUrl が指定されていない場合は必須)

        • remoteUrl (文字列): インターネット上のファイルへの URL (localPath が指定されていない場合は必須)

APIキーの取得

  1. 再送信アカウントに登録する

  2. 再送信ダッシュボードからAPIキーを生成する

注: 無料レベルは、1 か月あたり 3,000 通のメールまでご利用いただけます。

インストール

Clindeの使用（推奨）

Resend MCP Serverを使用する最も簡単な方法は、Clindeデスクトップアプリを使用することです。Clindeをダウンロードしてインストールし、以下の手順に従ってください。

  1. Clindeアプリを開く

  2. サーバーページに移動します

  3. resend-mcpを見つけてインストールをクリックします

これで完了です。技術的な知識は必要ありません。Clinde がすべてのインストールと設定をシームレスに処理します。

Claudeデスクトップの使用

これをclaude_desktop_config.jsonに追加します:

{
  "mcpServers": {
    "resend-mcp": {
      "command": "npx",
      "args": [
        "-y",
        "resend-mcp"
      ],
      "env": {
        "RESEND_API_KEY": "YOUR_RESEND_API_KEY_HERE (string, required)",
        "SENDER_EMAIL_ADDRESS": "YOUR_SENDER_EMAIL_ADDRESS_HERE (string, required)",
        "REPLY_TO_EMAIL_ADDRESSES": "YOUR_REPLY_TO_EMAIL_ADDRESSES_HERE (string, optional, comma delimited)"
      }
    }
  }
}

ライセンス

このMCPサーバーはMITライセンスに基づいてライセンスされています。つまり、MITライセンスの条件に従って、ソフトウェアを自由に使用、改変、配布することができます。詳細については、プロジェクトリポジトリのLICENSEファイルをご覧ください。

Available Tools

1 tool
send_emailC

Sends an email using the Resend API. Supports plain text content, attachments and optional scheduling. Can specify custom sender and reply-to addresses.

ParametersJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
attachmentsNoOptional. List of attachments. Each attachment must have a filename and either localPath (path to a local file) or remoteUrl (URL to a file on the internet).
contentYesPlain text email content
fromNoOptional. If provided, uses this as the sender email address; otherwise uses SENDER_EMAIL_ADDRESS environment variable
replyToNoOptional. If provided, uses these as the reply-to email addresses; otherwise uses REPLY_TO_EMAIL_ADDRESSES environment variable
scheduledAtNoOptional parameter to schedule the email. This uses natural language. Examples would be 'tomorrow at 10am' or 'in 2 hours' or 'next day at 9am PST' or 'Friday at 3pm ET'.
subjectYesEmail subject line
toYesRecipient email address

TDQS

C2.9/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions features like attachments and scheduling but lacks critical details: it doesn't specify authentication requirements (e.g., API keys), error handling, rate limits, or what happens on success/failure. For a tool that sends emails, this is a significant gap in transparency.

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?

The description is concise and well-structured in two sentences, with no wasted words. It front-loads the core purpose and efficiently lists key features. However, it could be slightly more informative without losing conciseness, such as by hinting at behavioral aspects.

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

Completeness2/5

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

Given the complexity of an email-sending tool with 7 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It lacks essential context like authentication needs, error handling, rate limits, and response format. This makes it inadequate for an agent to use the tool reliably in varied scenarios.

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?

The description adds minimal semantic value beyond the input schema, which has 100% coverage. It mentions 'plain text content, attachments and optional scheduling' and 'custom sender and reply-to addresses,' but these are already covered in the schema descriptions. No additional syntax or constraints are provided, so it meets the baseline for high schema coverage.

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?

The description clearly states the tool's purpose: 'Sends an email using the Resend API.' It specifies the action (send) and resource (email), and mentions key capabilities like plain text content, attachments, and scheduling. However, without sibling tools, there's no need for differentiation, so it doesn't score 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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It lists features but doesn't specify scenarios, prerequisites, or exclusions. For example, it doesn't mention when scheduling might fail or if there are rate limits, leaving the agent with minimal usage context.

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

Tool Schema Changelog

Recent tool additions, removals, and schema changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. 1 tool updatev1.0.0
    • First observedsend_email
Deploy Server
One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

TDQS

B3.1/5.0

Scored across 1 tool

Disambiguation5/5

With only one tool, there is no possibility of ambiguity or overlap between tools. The tool 'send_email' has a clear, singular purpose that cannot be confused with any other tool in this set.

Naming Consistency5/5

The single tool name 'send_email' follows a clear verb_noun pattern, and since there is only one tool, consistency is inherently perfect with no deviations or mixed conventions to evaluate.

Tool Count2/5

A single tool is too few for a server named 'MCP Server Resend', which implies a broader email-related domain. While 'send_email' is a core function, the lack of tools for operations like listing emails, checking status, or managing templates makes the set feel incomplete and under-scoped.

Completeness2/5

The tool set is severely incomplete for an email service domain. It only provides a 'send' operation, with no tools for reading, updating, deleting, or managing emails or related resources, which are essential for typical email workflows and will likely cause agent failures in broader tasks.

Maintenance

ActivityInactive
ResponsivenessNo issues

Resources

Related MCP Connectors

Related MCP Servers

  • IMAP MCP Server

    nikolausm
    A
    license
    A
    quality
    A
    maintenance
    Enables Claude to interact with email accounts via IMAP and SMTP, providing tools for searching, reading, sending, and managing emails across multiple providers.
    40
    1,133 npm
    103
    MIT

  • Resend MCP Server

    universal-mcp
    A
    license
    Not graded
    quality
    D
    maintenance
    Enables sending emails and managing email delivery through Resend's API, allowing users to compose and send emails using natural language.
    1
    MIT

  • Resend MCP Server

    blw10210
    A
    license
    Not graded
    quality
    D
    maintenance
    Enables sending emails via the Resend API from Claude, with tools for sending, checking delivery status, listing recent emails, and managing domains.
    16 npm
    1
    MIT

Appeared in Searches