Detect and remove 1x1 tracking pixels, read-receipt beacons, and surveillance redirect links from raw email HTML to block open tracking and redirect monitoring.
Scan and defuse invisible 1x1 tracking pixels, read receipt beacons, and surveillance redirect links in email HTML.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| html | Yes | The raw HTML of the email to sanitize |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations and no output schema, the description carries the full behavioral burden. 'Defuse' implies neutralization or removal, but it does not state whether the input is mutated, whether sanitized HTML is returned, what exactly is removed, or what side effects exist.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
It is a single front-loaded sentence with no filler. The action and the targeted tracking mechanisms are stated immediately.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
For a low-complexity one-parameter tool, the description is minimally adequate to invoke it. However, with no annotations or output schema, it leaves the return value and sanitization behavior unspecified, so the agent cannot confidently predict the result.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
There is only one parameter, 'html,' and schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents it as raw HTML to sanitize. The description adds no format or syntax detail beyond the schema, so the baseline score of 3 applies.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description uses a specific verb pair, 'scan and defuse,' with concrete targets: 1x1 tracking pixels, read receipt beacons, and redirect links in email HTML. It is clearly distinct from sibling tools that fetch, validate, or analyze email.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
It gives no explicit when-to-use guidance, prerequisites, or named alternatives. The 'in email HTML' scope implies context, but it does not tell an agent when to choose this over get_message or analyze_headers.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.