MisarBlog MCP Server

List newsletter issues

list_newsletter_issues

Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieve sent and scheduled newsletter issues from Misar.Blog, with an optional limit, to review or manage your newsletter queue. Requires API key authentication.

Instructions

Get your sent and scheduled newsletter issues. Requires API key authentication.

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": "list_newsletter_issues"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`limit`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedv5.2.0Nov 7, 2026
- removedInput schema / additionalProperties
```
Removed value: -false
```
Changed1 schema field changedv5.1.3Oct 14, 2026
- removedInput schema / properties / limit / description
```
Removed value: -"Issues to return, 1-50, newest first. Defaults to 10."
```
Changed1 schema field changedv5.1.0Aug 19, 2026
- addedInput schema / properties / limit / description
```
Added value: +"Issues to return, 1-50, newest first. Defaults to 10."
```
First observedv2.0.0Aug 4, 2026

TDQS

B3.2/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the API-key authentication requirement, which is useful context, but says nothing about pagination, ordering, or what a scheduled vs sent issue looks like in the response.

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?

Two short sentences with the resource scope front-loaded and no wasted wording. It is efficient, though the second sentence is a bare prerequisite rather than substantive behavioral detail.

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

Completeness3/5

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

For a simple read-only list tool with rich annotations and no output schema, the description covers purpose and auth but omits the one parameter's meaning and any return-shape hints. It is adequate but leaves a clear gap around the limit parameter.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters2/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The single parameter 'limit' has 0% schema description coverage, and the description never mentions it, so an agent gets no guidance on what it controls, its default of 10, or its maximum of 50. The description does not compensate for the schema gap.

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 ('Get') and resource ('sent and scheduled newsletter issues'), which distinguishes it from the sibling list_newsletter_subscribers. It does not explicitly name that sibling, but the resource scope is clear enough to separate the two.

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?

The phrase 'your sent and scheduled' implies the tool is scoped to the caller's own issues, but there is no explicit when-to-use guidance, no mention of alternatives, and no exclusions. Usage is only inferable from the resource name.

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