Skip to main content
Glama
chrischall

OurFamilyWizard MCP

by chrischall

ofw_save_draft

Save a message as a draft with optional recipients and attachments. Replace an existing draft while detecting conflicts from concurrent edits.

Instructions

Save a message as a draft in OurFamilyWizard. Recipients are optional. Pass messageId to replace an existing draft — note that under the hood this creates a NEW draft and deletes the old one (OFW's update-in-place endpoint silently no-ops while echoing the posted body, so we don't use it); the response.id will be the NEW id, not the messageId you passed, and the change is documented in a transparency NOTE in the response that also lists which fields (subject/body/recipients/replyToId/attachments) were carried over. If replyToId is provided, the cache may rewrite it to the latest reply in the thread (note included in response). Attach files by passing their fileIds (from ofw_upload_attachment) in myFileIDs. After saving, the tool re-fetches the draft from OFW to populate the local cache from authoritative server state, and the returned revision reflects that authoritative state (so it will match on your next edit). FIELD PRESERVATION: the response echoes the effective threading (replyToId/inReplyTo) and, whenever OFW did not carry over a requested replyToId, recipient or attachment, a warnings[] entry naming what was dropped — never a silent null. SAFETY: because replacing DESTROYS the old draft rather than merging, passing messageId first re-reads that draft from OFW and REFUSES the write if its subject/body/recipients changed since you read it (drafts edited in the OFW web app do not bump any timestamp, so the local cache can be silently behind). A pure replyToId normalization by OFW is NOT treated as a conflict. The refusal returns the current server body under serverBody — merge your edit into it and retry with expectedRevision.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
bodyYesMessage body text
forceNoDefault false. Overwrite even when the draft changed on OurFamilyWizard since you read it. The discarded server version is echoed back in the response. Only use after showing the user the conflict.
subjectYesMessage subject
messageIdNoID of an existing draft to replace (the new draft will have a new id; the old is deleted)
myFileIDsNoAttachment file ids (from ofw_upload_attachment)
replyToIdNoID of the message this draft replies to
recipientIdsNoArray of recipient user IDs (optional for drafts)
expectedRevisionNoWith messageId: the `revision` you got from ofw_list_drafts/ofw_get_message for that draft. Asserts you are replacing THAT version. If the draft changed on OFW since, the write is refused and the current server body is returned. Omit and the tool compares the server against the local cache instead — omitting never means "overwrite anyway".
Behavior5/5

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

The description goes far beyond annotations (only readOnlyHint: false) by disclosing that replacing a draft creates a new one and deletes the old, that response.id will be a new ID, that replyToId may be rewritten, that field preservation includes warnings, and that safety checks refuse write if draft changed. The annotation readOnlyHint: false is consistent with this mutation behavior.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is quite long but structured with sections (FIELD PRESERVATION, SAFETY, etc.) and front-loads key behavior. However, it could be more concise; some details like 'the change is documented in a transparency NOTE' are verbose. For a complex tool with 8 params, the length is justified but slightly excessive.

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

Completeness5/5

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

Despite lacking an output schema, the description effectively explains what the response contains (new id, warnings, serverBody for conflicts, revision). It covers all major behavioral aspects: replacement mechanism, field preservation, conflict detection, attachment handling, and threading. This is comprehensive for the tool's complexity.

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

Parameters4/5

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

Schema coverage is 100%, but the description adds significant meaning beyond parameter descriptions. It explains the effect of messageId (creates new draft, deletes old), force (overwrites conflict), expectedRevision (checks against local cache), and replyToId (may be normalized). These details guide correct usage beyond what the schema alone provides.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the tool saves a message as a draft in OurFamilyWizard, with specific verb ('save') and resource ('draft'). It distinguishes from siblings like ofw_send_message (sending) and ofw_delete_draft (deleting) by focusing on saving a draft.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description explains when to use the tool (saving new drafts, replacing existing ones with messageId, attaching files) and provides important context such as conflict detection and the effect of force. It implicitly distinguishes from other tools, but lacks explicit 'when not to use' statements.

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/chrischall/ofw-mcp'

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