SetLuca

Official

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

Create a broadcast

luca_broadcasts_create

Create a broadcast draft by providing a campaign ID and name, with optional audience segment targeting and idempotency key for safe retries.

Instructions

Create a broadcast draft. Body requires campaignId and name.

Luca operation: POST /api/broadcasts 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.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`body`	Yes
`workspaceId`	No	Optional Luca workspace id override.
`workspaceSlug`	No	Optional Luca workspace slug override.
`idempotencyKey`	No	Stable key for safe retries. If omitted, the MCP server generates a unique key for this call.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes
`provenance`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.4.0Oct 21, 2026

TDQS

A3.9/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already cover read-only and destructive safety, while the description adds required scopes, OAuth scope, data sensitivity, idempotency-key retry behavior, and workspace override behavior. It does not describe side effects beyond draft creation, but it adds substantial operational context 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?

Purpose is front-loaded, followed by operation, auth, idempotency, and workspace details. Some lines duplicate schema descriptions, but the structure is clean and largely earns its space.

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 a nested-schema mutation with an output schema, the description supplies endpoint, scopes, idempotency behavior, and workspace override guidance. It leaves segment and personalization details to the schema, which is acceptable but not fully rich.

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 75%, so the baseline is 3. The description restates that body requires campaignId and name, and repeats workspace/idempotency semantics already present in the schema, without adding much for the complex segment object.

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?

States the specific verb and resource: "Create a broadcast draft." The draft qualifier distinguishes it from siblings such as launch, approve, preview, and cancel.

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?

Usage is implied by "draft" and the sibling set, but there is no explicit when-to-use guidance or named alternative. The agent can infer the create-before-launch flow but is not directly told.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

Deploy Server