Skip to main content
Glama
pushplus

PushPlus MCP Server

Official
by pushplus
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

发送推送消息

send_push_message

Send push notifications to WeChat, email, SMS, and other channels via PushPlus. Choose from multiple templates and channels, with optional callback URLs for delivery tracking.

Instructions

通过 pushplus /send 接口发送推送消息。form/doc/excel/webdiff 模板必须传 pushId。

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
toNo好友令牌/企微用户id，多人用逗号隔开
preNo预处理编码，仅供会员使用
iconNo消息图标
titleNo消息标题，可选
topicNo群组编码，不填仅发送给自己；与to互斥，topic优先
optionNo渠道配置参数(原webhook参数)，与webhook等价；qq渠道不填发给自己，填群配置编码发到对应QQ群
pushIdNoform/doc/excel/webdiff 模板必填的详情页ID
channelNo推送渠道，默认wechat
contentYes消息内容，支持HTML、文本、Markdown等格式
webhookNo第三方webhook编码（非URL）
templateNo消息模板类型，默认html
timestampNo毫秒时间戳，过期则不发送
callbackUrlNo消息回调地址

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv1.0.11
    • changedInput schema / properties / channel / enum
      Previous value: -[
-  "wechat",
-  "webhook",
-  "cp",
-  "mail",
-  "sms",
-  "voice",
-  "extension",
-  "app",
-  "clawbot",
-  "qq"
-]New value: +[
+  "wechat",
+  "webhook",
+  "cp",
+  "mail",
+  "sms",
+  "voice",
+  "extension",
+  "app",
+  "clawbot",
+  "cmcc",
+  "qq"
+]
  2. First observedv1.0.9

TDQS

C2.9/5.0
Behavior2/5

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 discloses the endpoint and a conditional pushId requirement, but omits authentication needs, rate limits, delivery semantics, error behavior, or whether sending has side effects. For a send operation with 13 parameters, this is insufficient disclosure.

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 extremely compact: two sentences, no filler, and the critical pushId constraint is placed in the second sentence. Every word contributes, and the structure is easy to parse quickly.

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?

Despite the tool's complexity (13 parameters, 2 enums, no output schema, no annotations), the description provides only an endpoint reference and one constraint. It lacks guidance on channel/template defaults, topic/to precedence, timestamp expiry, and relation to sibling send tools, making it incomplete for reliable invocation.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description's pushId note largely restates what the schema already says ('form/doc/excel/webdiff 模板必填的详情页ID'), adding no genuinely new parameter meaning beyond the structured schema.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states a specific action ('send push message') against a named resource (pushplus /send interface). However, it does not distinguish itself from sibling tools like send_text_message, send_html_message, or batch_send_message, leaving some ambiguity about when this generic tool is preferred.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The only usage guidance is the pushId requirement for form/doc/excel/webdiff templates. There is no indication of when to use this tool versus the specialized send_* siblings or batch_send_message, and no mention of channel/template selection strategies.

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