Fluxmail

List scheduled emails

list_scheduled_emails

Read-only

Lists scheduled email sends for a Fluxmail account: pending messages with send times first, then sent, failed, or canceled sends, including failure errors.

Instructions

List scheduled sends: pending ones first (with sendAt), then past ones (sent, failed, canceled). For failed entries, lastError says what went wrong. Pending sends only fire while the Fluxmail server is running.

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`accountId`	No	Account to operate on. Optional when exactly one account is connected.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`data`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedv0.19.0Oct 30, 2026

changedInput schema / properties / accountId / anyOf

Previous value: -[
-  {
-    "minLength": 1,
-    "type": "string"
-  },
-  {
-    "type": "null"
-  }
-]New value: +[
+  {
+    "maxLength": 512,
+    "minLength": 1,
+    "type": "string"
+  },
+  {
+    "type": "null"
+  }
+]

Changed3 schema fields changedv0.15.0Oct 17, 2026
- addedInput schema / properties / accountId / anyOf
```
Added value: +[
+  {
+    "minLength": 1,
+    "type": "string"
+  },
+  {
+    "type": "null"
+  }
+]
```
- removedInput schema / properties / accountId / minLength
```
Removed value: -1
```
- removedInput schema / properties / accountId / type
```
Removed value: -"string"
```
Changed1 schema field changedv0.11.1Oct 1, 2026
- removedOutput schema / $schema
```
Removed value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"
```

Changed1 schema field changedv0.11.0Sep 26, 2026

changedOutput schema / (root)

Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "$schema": "http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#",
+  "additionalProperties": false,
+  "properties": {
+    "data": {
+      "items": {
+        "additionalProperties": true,
+        "properties": {
+          "accountId": {
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "draftId": {
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "scheduleId": {
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "status": {
+            "type": "string"
+          }
+        },
+        "required": [
+          "scheduleId",
+          "accountId",
+          "draftId",
+          "status"
+        ],
+        "type": "object"
+      },
+      "type": "array"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "data"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}

First observedv0.1.0Jul 26, 2026

TDQS

A3.8/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Consistent with readOnlyHint=true, and it adds real value beyond annotations: result ordering (pending first, then past), the statuses returned, the lastError field for failed entries, and the operational caveat that pending sends only fire while the Fluxmail server runs. That last caveat is exactly the kind of non-obvious behavior an agent cannot infer from annotations or schema.

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?

Three short sentences with zero filler: scope and ordering first, then field meaning, then the operational caveat. Each sentence carries distinct information and the essential content is front-loaded.

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

Completeness4/5

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

With an output schema present and full schema coverage, the description covers what remains: ordering, status semantics, the error field, and the server-running limitation. Adequate for a simple read-only list tool, though a pointer to cancel_scheduled_email for acting on pending items would close the last gap.

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?

Only one optional parameter (accountId) exists and schema coverage is 100%, so the schema fully documents it. The description adds nothing about the parameter, which is acceptable given the baseline for a fully documented single optional param.

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?

A specific verb and resource: "List scheduled sends" plus the exact status taxonomy (pending, sent, failed, canceled) makes the scope concrete and clearly distinct from list_emails or search_emails. It never names a sibling tool explicitly, so the differentiation is inferred rather than stated.

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 description gives enough context to imply when this applies (checking scheduled/failed sends, diagnosing failures via lastError), but it offers no explicit when-to-use versus when-not-to-use guidance and does not reference cancel_scheduled_email for acting on pending entries or list_emails for regular mail.

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