Skip to main content
Glama

win_back_email

Reconnect with past clients by sending a personal, warm re-engagement email. Briefly acknowledge the gap and close with a soft open-ended ask, not a pitch.

Instructions

Write a short, warm re-engagement email to a past client you haven't worked with in a while (6+ months). Distinct from availability_announcement (broadcast to all past clients) and reactivation_email (cold prospect from a mid-pitch conversation) — this is a targeted, personal one-to-one note to someone you've already delivered results for. The gap is acknowledged briefly and lightly, not apologised for. Closes with a soft open-ended ask ('are you working on anything at the moment?'), not a pitch. Does not count against your monthly draft limit.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
client_nameYesFirst name or full name of the past client
last_projectYesBrief description of the last project you delivered for them (e.g. 'the rebranding project', 'your SaaS MVP')
time_elapsedNoOptional: how long since you last worked together (e.g. 'six months', 'about a year'). If omitted, the email keeps it vague.
value_hookNoOptional: a specific, genuine reason to reach out now — a result you achieved that you want to share, something relevant you noticed about their business, a new capability that fits their context. Makes the email feel timely rather than random.
service_to_offerNoOptional: if there's a specific type of work you're hoping to pick up with them, name it (e.g. 'a second phase', 'ongoing SEO', 'a campaign for Q4'). If omitted, the email stays open-ended.
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 are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It clearly states it writes a draft email, but does not disclose whether it sends the email or if there are any side effects, auth requirements, or rate limits.

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?

The description is concise (four sentences) and front-loaded with the core purpose. Every sentence adds meaningful information without redundancy.

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 the relatively simple tool (no output schema, no nested objects), the description covers purpose, usage, parameter semantics, and behavioral constraints. It is sufficient for an agent to understand when and how to use it.

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?

All parameters have schema descriptions (100% coverage). The tool description adds value by explaining the effect of optional parameters (e.g., time_elapsed makes email less vague, value_hook adds timing context), beyond what the schema provides.

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 explicitly states the tool writes a re-engagement email to past clients, distinguishes it from two sibling tools (availability_announcement, reactivation_email), and specifies the target audience and tone.

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?

The description provides clear when-to-use criteria (past client, 6+ months gap) and contrasts with sibling tools. It also includes detailed content guidelines (acknowledge gap briefly, soft close) and states that it does not count against monthly draft limit.

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