Skip to main content
Glama

project_kickoff_email

Send a project kickoff email that transitions the client from hired to underway, covering timeline and next steps, with options for first-time, returning, or complex projects.

Instructions

Write the email that officially starts the project and sets the client up for a smooth engagement. Sent once the contract is signed and the deposit is in — this is the email that takes the client from 'hired' to 'we're underway'. Covers what happens next, the timeline, what you need from them, and any links or access to share. Three routes: first_project (default — you're working with this client for the first time; warm and structured; introduces your process and what they can expect at each stage), returning_client (you've worked together before; skips the formalities, gets straight to the project specifics — references shared shorthand, sets up the new timeline), complex_project (large or multi-phase project; more structured; lists phases with indicative dates, key milestones, and communication cadence; useful when misaligned expectations at the start cause trouble later). Distinct from working_agreement_email (which covers norms and ground rules) and proposal tools (pre-hire). Does not count against your monthly draft limit. Required: client_name. Optional: project_name (e.g. 'the Westbrook site rebrand', 'your Q3 content strategy'), kickoff_date (date work officially begins — e.g. 'Monday 24 June'), first_deliverable (what they'll receive first and when — e.g. 'initial wireframes by Friday 28 June'), access_links (tools/files/links to share — e.g. 'Notion workspace: https://...', 'shared Drive: https://...'), route ('first_project' | 'returning_client' | 'complex_project' — default first_project), your_name.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
client_nameYesClient first name
project_nameNoOptional: name of the project — e.g. 'the Westbrook rebrand', 'your Q3 content strategy'. Personalises the email.
kickoff_dateNoOptional: date work officially begins — e.g. 'Monday 24 June', 'this Thursday'. Sets expectations on timing.
first_deliverableNoOptional: what the client will receive first and when — e.g. 'initial wireframes by Friday 28 June', 'a discovery brief by end of this week'. Gives them something concrete to look forward to.
access_linksNoOptional: links, tools or shared resources to pass on — e.g. 'Notion workspace: https://...', 'shared Drive: https://...'. Paste as freeform text; will be formatted into the email.
routeNofirst_project (default) — new client, warm and structured, introduces your process; returning_client — you've worked together before, skip the formalities; complex_project — multi-phase project, structured phases and milestones.
your_nameNoOptional: your name for the sign-off
Behavior4/5

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It explains the email covers next steps, timeline, and client needs. Could mention if the email is drafted or sent, but overall adequate.

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?

Description is relatively long but well-structured, with front-loaded purpose, then route details, then parameter explanations. Every sentence adds value, though slightly verbose.

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?

Given 7 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is very complete, covering all parameters, usage, and differentiation from siblings.

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

Parameters5/5

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

Schema coverage is 100%, and description adds rich context for each parameter, including examples (e.g., project_name: 'the Westbrook site rebrand') and usage notes.

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 it writes the email that officially starts a project, with three distinct routes. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like working_agreement_email and proposal tools.

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 states when to use (after contract signed and deposit in), and when not to use (by distinguishing from other tools). Provides clear context for each route.

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