Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
SetLuca

SetLuca

Official
by setluca
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

Approve a broadcast

luca_broadcasts_approve
Destructive

Approve a broadcast draft and snapshot recipients to queue it for sending. Use the preview version and an idempotency key to safely finalize the broadcast.

Instructions

Approve a safe broadcast draft and snapshot recipients.

Luca operation: POST /api/broadcasts/{id}/approve Required scopes: broadcasts:write Required OAuth scope: luca:queue_ops; data sensitivity: full_content Requires Idempotency-Key. Provide idempotencyKey for safe retries, or the server will generate one. Use workspaceId or workspaceSlug to override the default workspace configured by environment.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "id": "<id>",
      "body": "<body>"
    },
    "name": "luca_broadcasts_approve"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYes
bodyYes
workspaceIdNoOptional Luca workspace id override.
workspaceSlugNoOptional Luca workspace slug override.
idempotencyKeyNoStable key for safe retries. If omitted, the MCP server generates a unique key for this call.

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes
provenanceNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changedv0.4.2
    • addedOutput schema / properties / result / properties / billingPaused
      Added value: +{
+  "type": "boolean"
+}
    • addedOutput schema / properties / result / properties / outcomes
      Added value: +{
+  "additionalProperties": true,
+  "properties": {
+    "callsBooked": {
+      "maximum": 9007199254740991,
+      "minimum": -9007199254740991,
+      "type": "integer"
+    },
+    "replied": {
+      "maximum": 9007199254740991,
+      "minimum": -9007199254740991,
+      "type": "integer"
+    },
+    "windowDays": {
+      "maximum": 9007199254740991,
+      "minimum": -9007199254740991,
+      "type": "integer"
+    }
+  },
+  "type": "object"
+}
  2. Changed2 schema fields changedv0.4.1
    • addedOutput schema / properties / result / properties / retryBlockedReason
      Added value: +{
+  "anyOf": [
+    {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    {
+      "type": "null"
+    }
+  ]
+}
    • changedOutput schema / properties / result / x-luca-redacted-fields
      Previous value: -[
-  "recipients[].messageBody",
-  "safetyReport.findings[].evidence",
-  "sampleMessages[].body",
-  "segmentSnapshot.excludedRecipients[].displayName",
-  "segmentSnapshot.leads[].customFields",
-  "segmentSnapshot.leads[].displayName",
-  "segmentSnapshot.leads[].messageBody"
-]New value: +[
+  "recipients[].messageBody",
+  "safetyReport.findings[].evidence",
+  "sampleMessages[].body",
+  "segmentSnapshot.excludedRecipients[].displayName",
+  "segmentSnapshot.leads[].customFields",
+  "segmentSnapshot.leads[].displayName",
+  "segmentSnapshot.leads[].messageBody",
+  "segmentSnapshot.leads[].templateMapping",
+  "segmentSnapshot.leads[].templatePart"
+]
  3. First observedv0.4.0

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and non-idempotent behavior, while the description adds operationally relevant context: required scopes, full-content data sensitivity, recipient snapshotting, idempotency-key behavior, and workspace override semantics. It still does not explain exactly what the destructive approval irrevocably changes, but it adds substantial value beyond the annotations.

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 compact and front-loads the purpose before listing operation, scopes, idempotency, and workspace override details. It contains little waste, though some lines are implementation metadata rather than task guidance.

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

Completeness3/5

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

For a five-parameter, nested-body mutation tool with an output schema, the description covers auth, idempotency, workspace override, and recipient snapshotting. However, it omits the meaning of the required previewVersion and id parameters and does not clarify behavior relative to adjacent approve/send/launch tools.

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 coverage is 60%. The description usefully explains the idempotencyKey fallback and workspaceId/workspaceSlug override behavior, but it does not explain the required id or the required nested previewVersion semantics. This is adequate but leaves significant required-parameter meaning to the 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 states a specific verb and resource: approve a broadcast draft, with the added effect of snapshot recipients. It is clear enough to separate approval from creation or preview, but it does not explicitly distinguish itself from close siblings such as luca_approve_and_send or luca_broadcasts_launch.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

The phrase 'Approve a safe broadcast draft' implies the use case, but there is no explicit when-to-use/when-not-to-use guidance or comparison with alternatives like launching or approve-and-send. Usage is inferable but not fully directed.

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