Purelymail MCP

Create user

create_user

Creates a new mailbox user on a specified domain, requiring a username and password, with optional recovery email, phone, welcome email, and password-reset settings.

Instructions

Creates a new mailbox user on a domain.

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": {
      "userName": "<userName>",
      "domainName": "<domainName>",
      "password": "<password>"
    },
    "name": "create_user"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`password`	Yes
`userName`	Yes	Local part only, e.g. "user" in "user@domain.com"
`domainName`	Yes
`recoveryEmail`	No
`recoveryPhone`	No
`sendWelcomeEmail`	No	Defaults to true
`enablePasswordReset`	No	Defaults to true
`enableSearchIndexing`	No	Defaults to true
`recoveryEmailDescription`	No
`recoveryPhoneDescription`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.1Nov 13, 2026

TDQS

C2.7/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

Annotations already declare this is a non-read-only, non-destructive, open-world write, so safety framing is covered. The description adds nothing beyond that: it does not mention that a welcome email and password-reset/indexing options are enabled by default, nor what happens on failure (e.g., duplicate username, unknown domain) or whether the operation consumes account credit.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler, which is structurally clean. It is arguably too terse rather than too long, but there is no wasted wording to penalize.

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?

For a 10-parameter user-provisioning mutation with no output schema and no documented return value, the description is thin. It omits side effects, defaults, prerequisite ordering, and any hint about what the successful response contains or how to retrieve the created user afterwards.

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?

With 10 parameters and only 40% schema description coverage, the description needs to carry meaning for the undocumented inputs, yet it says nothing about any parameter. Key fields like domainName, password, and the recoveryEmail/recoveryPhone description pairs are left entirely to inference.

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 states a specific verb and resource ('Creates a new mailbox user') plus scope ('on a domain'), which is far more informative than the bare name 'create_user'. It does not, however, explicitly differentiate itself from adjacent creation tools such as create_app_password or add_domain.

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 guidance on when to use this versus modify_user, get_user, or add_domain, and no stated prerequisites such as the domain having to exist first or account credit being sufficient. The agent must infer all sequencing from sibling names alone.

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