Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
SetLuca

SetLuca

Official
by setluca
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

Launch a broadcast

luca_broadcasts_launch
Destructive

Launch an approved broadcast to send messages to live leads. Requires confirm: true, and supports idempotency keys for safe retries.

Instructions

Launch an approved broadcast. Sends messages to live leads.

Luca operation: POST /api/broadcasts/{id}/launch 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. Destructive: has a real-world side effect. You must pass confirm: true; the call is rejected without it. 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>"
    },
    "name": "luca_broadcasts_launch"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYes
confirmNoThis tool has a real-world side effect: it messages real leads, books, moves, or cancels a call, changes a lead's consent, imports leads, writes to a connected calendar or CRM, sends workspace events to an outside URL, or re-triggers downstream automations. Pass confirm: true to proceed; the call is rejected without it.
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

A4.1/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the annotations, the description discloses the endpoint, required scopes, data sensitivity, the mandatory Idempotency-Key with server-side generation fallback, and the confirm gate that causes rejection. It also spells out the real-world side effect of messaging live leads, which is exactly the context an agent needs before a destructive call.

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 purpose and effect are front-loaded in the first sentence, followed by a compact operational block. A few lines (endpoint path, sensitivity tag) are boilerplate rather than decision-relevant, but overall there is little waste.

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 destructive launch operation with five parameters, an output schema, and full annotation coverage, the description covers the prerequisites, the confirm gate, idempotency, and workspace scoping. Only failure modes or post-launch state transitions are omitted, which is minor given the output schema exists.

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 already 80%, and the schema descriptions for confirm, workspaceId, workspaceSlug, and idempotencyKey are detailed. The description largely restates those mechanics (idempotency fallback, workspace override) rather than adding new meaning, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 gives a specific verb and resource ("Launch an approved broadcast") plus the concrete effect ("Sends messages to live leads"). It also embeds the precondition that the broadcast must already be approved, which implicitly separates it from luca_broadcasts_approve or luca_broadcasts_preview, though no sibling is named explicitly.

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?

It states clear preconditions for use (the broadcast must be approved, confirm: true must be passed or the call is rejected) and gives context for workspace overrides. It stops short of explicitly routing the agent to alternatives such as previewing before launch or approving first, so guidance is strong but not exhaustive.

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