Skip to main content
Glama
Meerkats-Ai

Hatch MCP Server

by Meerkats-Ai

hatch_verify_email

Validate email addresses to confirm they are active and deliverable. This tool checks email authenticity for reliable communication.

Instructions

Verify if an email address is valid and active.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
emailYesEmail address to verify

Implementation Reference

  • The main handler for the 'hatch_verify_email' tool within the CallToolRequestSchema switch statement. Validates input using isVerifyEmailParams type guard, makes a POST request to the Hatch API '/v1/verifyEmail' endpoint with retry logic, and returns the JSON response or an error message.
    case 'hatch_verify_email': {
      if (!isVerifyEmailParams(args)) {
        throw new McpError(
          ErrorCode.InvalidParams,
          'Invalid arguments for hatch_verify_email'
        );
      }
    
      try {
        const response = await withRetry(
          async () => apiClient.post('/v1/verifyEmail', args),
          'verify email'
        );
    
        return {
          content: [
            {
              type: 'text',
              text: JSON.stringify(response.data, null, 2),
            },
          ],
          isError: false,
        };
      } catch (error) {
        const errorMessage = axios.isAxiosError(error)
          ? `API Error: ${error.response?.data?.message || error.message}`
          : `Error: ${error instanceof Error ? error.message : String(error)}`;
    
        return {
          content: [{ type: 'text', text: errorMessage }],
          isError: true,
        };
      }
    }
  • Tool schema definition for 'hatch_verify_email', including name, description, and input schema requiring a single 'email' string property.
    const VERIFY_EMAIL_TOOL: Tool = {
      name: 'hatch_verify_email',
      description: 'Verify if an email address is valid and active.',
      inputSchema: {
        type: 'object',
        properties: {
          email: {
            type: 'string',
            description: 'Email address to verify',
          },
        },
        required: ['email'],
      },
    };
  • src/index.ts:312-320 (registration)
    Registration of the tool list handler via setRequestHandler for ListToolsRequestSchema, which includes 'hatch_verify_email' (VERIFY_EMAIL_TOOL) among the available tools.
    server.setRequestHandler(ListToolsRequestSchema, async () => ({
      tools: [
        FIND_EMAIL_TOOL,
        FIND_PHONE_TOOL,
        VERIFY_EMAIL_TOOL,
        FIND_COMPANY_DATA_TOOL,
        GET_LINKEDIN_URL_TOOL,
      ],
    }));
  • Type guard helper function to validate if the tool arguments match the expected VerifyEmailParams shape (contains 'email' as string).
    function isVerifyEmailParams(args: unknown): args is VerifyEmailParams {
      return (
        typeof args === 'object' &&
        args !== null &&
        'email' in args &&
        typeof (args as { email: unknown }).email === 'string'
      );
    }
  • TypeScript interface defining the expected input parameters for the 'hatch_verify_email' tool.
    interface VerifyEmailParams {
      email: string;
    }
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 states the tool verifies email validity and activity, but doesn't explain what 'valid and active' means operationally (e.g., syntax check, domain verification, mailbox ping). It lacks details about rate limits, authentication requirements, error handling, or what constitutes a successful verification.

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?

The description is extremely concise at just one sentence with zero wasted words. It's front-loaded with the core purpose and efficiently communicates the essential function. Every word earns its place without unnecessary elaboration.

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 no annotations and no output schema, the description is incomplete for a verification tool. It doesn't explain what verification results look like (e.g., boolean response, confidence score, detailed status). For a tool that presumably returns verification outcomes, the lack of output information creates significant ambiguity for an agent trying to use it correctly.

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 input schema has 100% description coverage, clearly documenting the single 'email' parameter. The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what the schema provides. It doesn't specify email format requirements, validation rules, or examples. The baseline score of 3 reflects adequate coverage when the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 with a specific verb ('verify') and resource ('email address'), and specifies what is being verified ('valid and active'). It distinguishes itself from siblings like 'hatch_find_email' by focusing on verification rather than discovery. However, it doesn't explicitly contrast with siblings in the description text itself.

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 doesn't mention sibling tools like 'hatch_find_email' for email discovery or other verification methods. There's no context about prerequisites, limitations, or typical use cases for email verification.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/Meerkats-Ai/hatch-mcp-server'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server