GetMattered

List Sent Follow-ups

getmattered_list_sent_follow_ups

Read-onlyIdempotent

Lists follow-ups already sent or recorded for your job applications, newest first, with job, company, attempt number, channel, recipient, subject and date. Use it after a send timeout or error to check before resending.

Instructions

List the follow-ups the user already sent or recorded, newest first: job, company, attempt number, channel, recipient, subject and date, 20 per page. Pass cursor from the previous answer for older ones. Read-only: it changes nothing and spends no credits. Call it after a timeout or an error from getmattered_send_follow_up, before sending again. Do not use it to find the applications that need a follow-up now; use getmattered_list_due_follow_ups. Next: getmattered_list_due_follow_ups.

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`cursor`	No	The nextCursor from the previous page. Omit it for the newest.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description
`draft`	Yes	From getmattered_draft_follow_up: the drafted message. Nothing was sent.
`action`	Yes	The operation that ran: list, history, draft, send or record_sent.
`history`	Yes	From getmattered_list_sent_follow_ups: follow-ups already sent, newest first.
`recorded`	Yes	From getmattered_send_follow_up or getmattered_record_follow_up: the follow-up count after it was recorded.
`followUps`	Yes	From getmattered_list_due_follow_ups: applications whose follow-up is due, most urgent first.
`nextCursor`	Yes	From getmattered_list_sent_follow_ups: pass as cursor for the next page. Null on the last page.
`notConfirmed`	Yes	True when the user declined the confirmation and nothing was sent.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Addedv1.10.2Oct 25, 2026

TDQS

A4.6/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already declare read-only and idempotent behavior, but the description adds meaningful operational context: it changes nothing, spends no credits, returns results newest first, paginates at 20 per page, and is safe to use for retry recovery. This goes beyond the structured annotations.

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?

The description is front-loaded with the key scope and return fields, then covers pagination, safety, and alternatives. It is mostly efficient, though the closing 'Next: getmattered_list_due_follow_ups' is redundant after already naming that alternative.

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?

With annotations, full schema coverage, an output schema, and a clear description of scope, pagination, return fields, and retry usage, an agent has everything needed to select and invoke the tool correctly.

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?

There is only one parameter and schema coverage is 100%, so the schema already fully documents the cursor. The description reinforces pagination by saying to pass the cursor from the previous answer for older items, but adds little beyond the schema's own explanation.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('List the follow-ups') and precisely scopes it to follow-ups already sent or recorded, newest first. It names the returned fields and explicitly distinguishes this from the sibling tool for due follow-ups.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

Gives explicit when-to-use guidance: after a timeout or error from getmattered_send_follow_up, before sending again. It also gives a clear exclusion ('Do not use it to find applications that need a follow-up now') and names the correct alternative.

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

Deploy Server