Skip to main content
Glama

create_thread

Create a new support thread for a customer using markdown content; automatically creates the customer by email if they don't exist.

Instructions

Create a new support thread for a customer. Provide exactly one customer identifier (email, ID, or external ID) and markdown content for the initial message. When using customerEmail, the customer is automatically created in Plain if they don't exist. Optionally set title, description, priority, labels, custom fields, and external ID.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
appNoAffected app identifier (e.g. 'web', 'mobile', 'api')
stageNoEnvironment stage (e.g. 'production', 'staging', 'develop')
titleNoThread title
githubPrNoGitHub PR URL
markdownYesMarkdown content for the first timeline entry in the thread
priorityNoPriority: 0 = urgent, 1 = high, 2 = normal (default), 3 = low
tenantIdNoTenant ID to associate with the thread
customerIdNoExisting Plain customer ID. Provide either customerEmail, customerId, or customerExternalId.
externalIdNoYour own unique identifier for this thread
descriptionNoThread description / preview text
impactLevelNoImpact level: P0 (critical), P1, P2, RBS (release blocker staging), RBP (release blocker production), not-a-bug
labelTypeIdsNoLabel type IDs to attach. Use get_label_types to discover available IDs.
notionTicketNoNotion ticket URL or ID
reportedFromNoURL where the issue was reported from
customerEmailNoCustomer email address. Provide either customerEmail, customerId, or customerExternalId.
sentrySessionNoSentry replay URL or replay ID
posthogSessionNoPostHog session replay URL or session recording ID
requestFeatureNoWhether this is a feature request
customerFullNameNoCustomer full name. Used when upserting a customer by email (ignored when customerId is provided).
customerExternalIdNoCustomer external ID. Provide either customerEmail, customerId, or customerExternalId.
Behavior4/5

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses auto-creation when using customerEmail, which is valuable. However, it does not mention rate limits, authentication needs, or error behavior. Overall adequate for transparency.

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 sentences: first for purpose and required inputs, second for optional fields. It is front-loaded with the core action, and every sentence adds value. No unnecessary words.

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?

The description covers the tool's purpose, required parameters, and key behavior (auto-creation). It does not mention the return value (likely a thread) or error scenarios, but given the complexity (20 parameters) and no output schema, it provides sufficient context for an agent to use the tool correctly.

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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds context beyond the schema by grouping customer identifiers and explaining the auto-creation behavior. It also clarifies that customerFullName is used only when upserting by email, which is not in the schema.

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 creates a new support thread for a customer, using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from siblings like reply_to_thread or add_internal_note by focusing on thread creation.

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 clear guidance on required inputs ('exactly one customer identifier') and optional fields. It implicitly differentiates from sibling tools, but could explicitly state when not to use this tool (e.g., for existing threads, use reply_to_thread).

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/orbit-logistics/mcp-plain'

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