Skip to main content
Glama
optimize-overseas

lob-mcp

by optimize-overseas
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

Create a check (BILLABLE + DRAWS FUNDS)

lob_checks_create
DestructiveIdempotent

Commit a check send to mail a physical check. Requires a verified bank account and recipient address; optionally preview and confirm in live mode.

Instructions

Commit a check send. HIGH IMPACT: incurs Lob fees AND draws the check amount from the linked bank account when cashed. Requires a verified bank account ID (bank_…). In live mode, requires a confirmation_token from lob_checks_preview that matches the current payload. If LOB_REQUIRE_ELICITATION_FOR_CHECKS_OVER_USD is set and amount exceeds it, an elicitation form must be confirmed by the user before dispatch.

For the bottom of the check page, Lob requires exactly one of message (plain text, max 400 chars) or check_bottom (custom template / HTML / PDF, typically paired with merge_variables).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
toYesRecipient address. Either a saved address ID (`adr_…`) or an inline address.
fromYesSender (return) address. Either a saved address ID (`adr_…`) or an inline address.
logoNoLogo printed on the check face (upper-left, grayscale; PNG or JPG).
memoNoMemo line on the check (max 40 chars).
extraNoAdditional Lob API parameters not enumerated above. Merged into the request body verbatim. See https://docs.lob.com for the full parameter list per resource.
amountYesCheck amount in USD (e.g. 125.50).
messageNoPlain-text message printed on the bottom of the check page (max 400 chars). Mutually exclusive with `check_bottom`.
metadataNoUp to 20 string key/value pairs to attach to the resource.
use_typeNoRequired for some mail classes. 'marketing' for promotional, 'operational' for transactional.
mail_typeNoMail class. Defaults to usps_first_class for most pieces.
send_dateNoISO 8601 timestamp (e.g. '2026-05-01T00:00:00Z') to schedule the send. Must be at most 180 days in the future.
attachmentNoSecondary document included in the envelope after the check page. Up to 6 pages.
descriptionNoInternal description (max 255 chars).
bank_accountYesVerified Lob bank account ID.
check_bottomNoCustom artwork for the bottom half of the check page. Accepts a Lob template ID (`tmpl_…`), an HTML string, an https:// URL, or a base64 PDF. Mutually exclusive with `message`.
check_numberNoOptional check number; auto-assigned if omitted.
idempotency_keyNoIdempotency key (max 256 chars). If omitted, the server auto-generates a value derived from the confirmation_token when present, otherwise a fresh UUIDv4. Lob deduplicates identical keys for 24 hours.
merge_variablesNoKey/value pairs substituted into Handlebars-style {{variables}} in your HTML/template content.
billing_group_idNoBilling group ID (`bg_…`) to attribute the charge to.
confirmation_tokenNoToken from lob_checks_preview. Required in live mode (LOB_LIVE_MODE=true).

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.3.0

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Beyond annotations (destructiveHint: true, idempotentHint: true), the description adds that it incurs fees, draws funds, requires confirmation_token, and an elicitation form condition. No contradiction with annotations.

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 two concise paragraphs. The first covers impact and prerequisites; the second clarifies bottom options. Every sentence is necessary and well-placed, with no redundancy.

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

Completeness4/5

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

Given 20 parameters and full schema descriptions, the description covers the critical behavioral aspects (fees, validation, mutual exclusivity). It doesn't need to list all params; the schema does that. Additional output schema absence is not a gap here.

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 100% schema coverage, the description adds value by explaining the message/check_bottom mutual exclusivity and confirming the idempotency key behavior. It also references the elicitation condition related to amount.

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 'Commit a check send' and highlights 'HIGH IMPACT' with financial implications, distinguishing it from sibling tools like lob_checks_cancel, lob_checks_get, etc. It also mentions the need for a verified bank account and confirmation token, which are key to its purpose.

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?

The description provides explicit prerequisites (verified bank account, confirmation_token in live mode), an elicitation condition, and the mutual exclusivity of message/check_bottom. It doesn't explicitly compare to alternatives but implies this is the creation 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