Skip to main content
Glama

send_email

Send emails through SMTP, API services, or webhooks like Slack and Discord. Supports HTML bodies, CC, and BCC for flexible communication.

Instructions

Send an email via specified email service.

Sends an email using the specified email service. Supports SMTP, API-based services, local testing services, and webhook integrations. Automatically detects service capabilities and uses the appropriate sending method.

Args: to: Recipient email address(es). Can be: - Single address: "user@example.com" - Comma-separated: "user1@example.com, user2@example.com" - List: ["user1@example.com", "user2@example.com"] subject: Email subject line. Required. body: Plain text email body. Required. This serves as the fallback for email clients that don't support HTML. service: Email service to use. Options: - "default": Default SMTP/IMAP service (from env vars) - "sendgrid": SendGrid transactional email - "mailgun": Mailgun transactional email - "resend": Resend transactional email - "mailhog": Local MailHog testing service - "slack": Send to Slack webhook - "discord": Send to Discord webhook - Custom service names configured via EMAIL_SERVICES html: Optional HTML email body. If provided, the email will be sent as multipart/alternative with both text and HTML versions. Example: "TitleContent" cc: Optional CC (carbon copy) recipients. Same format as 'to'. bcc: Optional BCC (blind carbon copy) recipients. Same format as 'to'.

Returns: Dictionary with service-specific results: { "success": bool, # True if email sent successfully "status": str, # "sent" on success "service": str, # Service used "to": str, # Recipient address(es) "subject": str, # Email subject "error": str # Error message if success is False }

Examples: # Send via default SMTP service send_email( to="user@example.com", subject="Hello", body="This is a test email" )

# Send via SendGrid
send_email(
    to="user@example.com",
    subject="Welcome",
    body="Welcome to our service",
    service="sendgrid",
    html="<h1>Welcome!</h1><p>Thanks for joining.</p>"
)

# Send to Slack webhook
send_email(
    to="general",
    subject="Alert",
    body="System alert message",
    service="slack"
)

Notes: - Service availability depends on configuration - API services may have different rate limits and features - Local testing services don't send real emails - Webhook services convert emails to chat messages

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
toYes
subjectYes
bodyYes
serviceNodefault
htmlNo
ccNo
bccNo

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Behavior5/5

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

Despite no annotations, the description fully discloses behavior: supports multiple services, automatic detection, multipart emails, return format with success/error, and notes on service limitations. No contradictions.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is well-structured with Args, Returns, Examples, and Notes sections. It front-loads the main purpose and is appropriately detailed for a complex tool, though slightly verbose. Every sentence serves a purpose.

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 7 parameters, 3 required, no annotations, and an output schema, the description covers all aspects: parameter details, return format, examples, and notes. It fully equips 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.

Parameters5/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The description adds extensive meaning beyond the schema's type/required fields: formats for email addresses, service options, HTML usage, and default values. It compensates for 0% schema description coverage with detailed parameter documentation.

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 'Send an email via specified email service' and lists supported services. It distinguishes from sibling tools like check_inbox, configure_service, etc., by focusing on sending emails with various backends.

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 detailed usage guidance with parameter formats, service options, and examples. It implicitly tells when to use different services (e.g., webhooks for chat). However, it lacks explicit 'when not to use' or alternatives for sibling tools, though the context makes it clear.

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/sandraschi/email-mcp'

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