Skip to main content
Glama
growsurf

GrowSurf MCP Server

Official
by growsurf
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Hybrid

Update Program Emails

growsurf_update_campaign_emails
DestructiveIdempotent

Update writable GrowSurf campaign email fields, including sender name and reply-to address, and target a program by campaign ID when needed.

Instructions

Update writable Emails tab fields for your GrowSurf program under fields, in their existing nested shape. settings.sender.fromEmail is read-only; sender address changes require domain verification in the dashboard. settings.sender.fromName and settings.sender.replyToEmail are writable. The invite and transactional email isEnabled toggles are read-only. Email bodies require their template links and footer tokens. Omitted fields retain their existing content; arrays replace wholesale. Targets campaignId if supplied, otherwise GROWSURF_CAMPAIGN_ID.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
fieldsYes
campaignIdNoTarget program (campaign) id for this call. Defaults to GROWSURF_CAMPAIGN_ID when omitted. Program IDs also identify newly created programs without restarting the server.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv0.19.9
    • changedInput schema / properties / campaignId / description
      Previous value: -"Target program (campaign) id for this call. Defaults to GROWSURF_CAMPAIGN_ID when omitted. Pass the `id` returned by growsurf_create_campaign to configure or operate a program you just created, without restarting the server."New value: +"Target program (campaign) id for this call. Defaults to GROWSURF_CAMPAIGN_ID when omitted. Program IDs also identify newly created programs without restarting the server."
  2. Changed1 schema field changedv0.19.8
    • addedInput schema / properties / fields / properties
      Added value: +{
+  "settings": {
+    "additionalProperties": true,
+    "properties": {
+      "sender": {
+        "additionalProperties": true,
+        "description": "Patch `fromName` or `replyToEmail`. Change the read-only `fromEmail` in the dashboard after domain verification.",
+        "not": {
+          "required": [
+            "fromEmail"
+          ]
+        },
+        "properties": {
+          "fromName": {
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "replyToEmail": {
+            "type": "string"
+          }
+        },
+        "type": "object"
+      }
+    },
+    "type": "object"
+  }
+}
  3. First observedv0.12.2

TDQS

A4.7/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Adds substantive behavior beyond the annotations (destructiveHint=true, idempotentHint=true): omitted fields retain existing content, arrays replace wholesale, sender address changes require dashboard domain verification, and email bodies require template links and footer tokens. This tells the agent exactly what is preserved vs destroyed, which the annotations alone cannot.

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?

Front-loads the core action and scope, then layers constraints and targeting in dense but non-redundant sentences. No sentence merely restates the schema or title.

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?

For a nested patch mutation with an output schema present, the description covers the essential gaps: patch semantics, per-field writability, array replacement behavior, and target resolution via campaignId or GROWSURF_CAMPAIGN_ID. Return values need not be described given the output schema.

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?

With 50% schema description coverage, the description compensates by naming writable vs read-only subfields (fromName/replyToEmail writable, fromEmail read-only) and by pointing to the existing nested shape. It still leaves the full shape of `fields` to be learned elsewhere, but adds real meaning over the schema.

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 (Update) and resource (writable Emails tab fields for a GrowSurf program), and immediately scopes it to the `fields` object. It is clearly distinguishable from the read-only `growsurf_get_campaign_emails` sibling and from the broader `growsurf_update_campaign`.

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?

Gives clear context for use (patch only writable fields, omit to retain) and implicitly routes read-only fields (fromEmail, invite/transactional toggles) to the dashboard instead. It stops short of naming an alternative sibling tool or stating explicit when-not conditions for the whole tool.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools