Skip to main content
Glama

client_check_in_email

Send a brief, warm check-in email during a project to prevent client anxiety and avoid 'where are we' interruptions—keeps clients informed without a full status report.

Instructions

Write a short proactive check-in email during a long project — the 'just wanted you to know things are on track' message that prevents client anxiety and the 'where are we with this?' interruption. Under 100 words. Different from project_status_update (which is a full structured weekly report): this is a light, warm pulse sent mid-phase to maintain trust during silent execution periods. Does not count against your monthly draft limit.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
client_nameYesThe client's first name
project_nameYesThe project name or description
current_stageYesWhere things stand right now (e.g. 'about halfway through the design phase', 'finalizing the copy before the first draft', 'in build — the homepage and services pages are done')
next_milestoneYesThe next thing the client will see or hear from you (e.g. 'the first draft for your review on Thursday', 'a call to walk through the prototype next week', 'the completed site for sign-off by end of month')
on_trackNoOptional: whether the project is on track for the agreed timeline (default: true). If false, the email will flag the issue and invite a call rather than pretend everything is fine.
blockerNoOptional: only used when on_track is false — what's causing the issue or what you need from them (e.g. 'I'm still waiting on the brand guidelines we discussed', 'a question came up about the payment integration that needs your input')
your_nameNoOptional: your name for the sign-off
Behavior3/5

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. Describes email content and tone but does not explicitly state whether the tool sends the email or just generates draft. Ambiguous about saving vs outputting.

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?

Four sentences, front-loaded with main purpose. Efficiently conveys core info without fluff. Slightly verbose in some phrases but overall well-structured.

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

Completeness3/5

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

Provides good usage context and distinction from sibling, but lacks output format details (plain text, subject line, etc.) since no output schema. Does not clarify save/send behavior, leaving gaps for agent invocation.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100% with detailed param descriptions. The tool description adds overall context (tone, word limit) but does not significantly enhance parameter understanding. Baseline 3 due to high schema coverage.

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 states it writes a short proactive check-in email during long projects, distinguishes from project_status_update (light vs full report), and specifies word limit and purpose. Clear verb+resource with sibling differentiation.

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?

Explicitly tells when to use (mid-phase, silent execution periods), when not to (not a full weekly report), and mentions draft limit policy. Directs to project_status_update for alternatives.

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/jabbawocky/proposalcraft'

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