Skip to main content
Glama

impri_push_action

Submit an action to a human-approval inbox for review. The operator approves, rejects, or edits it from their web or mobile inbox.

Instructions

Submit an action to the Impri human-approval inbox.

The action appears in the operator's web and mobile inbox as a card with a title, formatted preview, and optional tap-to-edit fields. The operator approves or rejects with one tap; you poll for the decision with impri_await_decision.

Returns { action_id, status: "pending", inbox_url }. Save action_id — you need it for all follow-up calls.

Example — send a draft Reddit reply for review: kind: "reddit.comment" title: "Reply: Why is resume advice so conflicting?" preview: { format: "markdown", body: "The advice conflicts because different advisors optimise for different audiences..." } target_url: "https://reddit.com/r/cscareerquestions/comments/..." editable: ["preview.body"] // lets the reviewer tweak wording before approving

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
kindYesTaxonomy label used for inbox filtering (e.g. 'reddit.comment', 'email.send', 'blog.publish'). Free-form; choose a consistent scheme.
titleYesShort headline shown in the inbox card. Keep it under 120 characters.
payloadNoOpaque data echoed back in the webhook callback — useful for storing context (e.g. Reddit post id, draft id, queue position). Not shown to the reviewer.
previewYesThe content the reviewer reads before deciding.
editableNoDot-notation fields the reviewer may edit before approving (e.g. ['preview.body']). The final edited values are echoed back in the approved action.
expires_inNoSeconds until the action auto-expires (default 86400 = 24 h). After expiry the status becomes 'expired' and no decision can be made.
target_urlNoURL the reviewer can open for context (e.g. the Reddit thread, the email draft). Optional but strongly recommended.
idempotency_keyNoStable key to prevent duplicate submissions on retry. The same key within 24 h returns the original action instead of creating a new one.
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, description covers action lifecycle (submission, pending, approval/rejection, expiry), return values, and editable fields. Good detail on behavior beyond creation.

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?

Well-structured with intro, return value, and example. Efficient but could be slightly shorter; no wasted sentences.

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?

For an 8-parameter submission tool without output schema, description covers key aspects: return shape, idempotency, expiry, preview format, and editable fields. Adequate for agent to invoke 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 has 100% coverage, description adds value by explaining workflow, providing example mapping, clarifying editable dot-notation, and noting idempotency. Does not repeat schema but enriches context.

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?

Clear verb 'Submit an action' and specific resource 'Impri human-approval inbox'. Differentiates from sibling impri_await_decision by noting polling, and example shows concrete usage.

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 describes use case for human approval, mentions polling for decision, and provides example. Lacks explicit 'when not to use' instructions but context is 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/sekera-radim/impri'

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