jotae-mcp

create_automation

Create a single automation for an event by configuring channel, trigger, template, and delay to send targeted messages based on attendee actions.

Instructions

Cria uma automação individual em um evento. Prefira apply_timeline para configurar tudo de uma vez.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "event_id": "<event_id>",
      "channel": "<channel>",
      "trigger": "<trigger>",
      "template_id": "<template_id>",
      "destination": "<destination>"
    },
    "name": "create_automation"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`label`	No	Nome descritivo da automação
`channel`	Yes
`trigger`	Yes
`event_id`	Yes
`group_id`	No	ID do grupo WhatsApp (quando destination=group)
`destination`	Yes	Destino: individual (padrão) ou group. Obrigatório.
`template_id`	Yes	ID do template (obrigatório — use list_templates para obter o ID)
`scheduled_at`	No	ISO 8601 — obrigatório quando trigger=scheduled
`delay_minutes`	No	Minutos após o gatilho (negativo = antes)
`exclude_list_id`	No	ID da lista de exclusão (quem não recebe)
`audience_list_id`	No	ID da lista de destinatários (filtra quem recebe)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.8Jun 27, 2026

TDQS

A3.6/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

No annotations provided, description only says 'creates an automation'. No details on side effects, permissions, validation, or behavior on duplicates. Inadequate for a creation tool.

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?

Two sentences, no redundancy, front-loaded with purpose and alternative guidance. Every word earns its place.

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

Completeness2/5

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

Tool has 11 parameters and 5 required, but description does not explain overall workflow, return values, or error conditions. Sibling tools are many, but only one alternative is mentioned. Incomplete for the complexity.

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 73%, so many parameters are already documented. The description adds no parameter-specific context beyond that. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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?

Description clearly states it creates an individual automation for an event, and explicitly contrasts with sibling tool apply_timeline. Verb+resource are specific and distinct.

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?

Explicitly recommends apply_timeline for configuring everything at once, giving a clear when-to-use vs alternative. Lacks explicit when-not-to-use beyond that.

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