Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
SetLuca

SetLuca

Official
by setluca
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

Preview a broadcast

luca_broadcasts_preview
Destructive

Refresh a broadcast's recipient and sample-message preview before sending. Use it to verify who receives a DM broadcast and how the sample message renders.

Instructions

Refresh broadcast recipient and sample-message preview.

Luca operation: POST /api/broadcasts/{id}/preview 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>"
    },
    "name": "luca_broadcasts_preview"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYes
bodyNo
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. Changed3 schema fields changedv0.4.1
    • changedInput schema / required
      Previous value: -[
-  "id",
-  "body"
-]New value: +[
+  "id"
+]
    • 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

B3.2/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

The description adds genuinely useful operational context beyond annotations — required scopes (broadcasts:write, luca:queue_ops), full_content data sensitivity, and the idempotency-key requirement. However, annotations declare destructiveHint=true for what is framed as a "preview" and the description never reconciles that (what, if anything, is overwritten). The "safe retries" language also sits in mild tension with idempotentHint=false; the server-generated-key detail explains the gap but is not stated explicitly enough to read as consistent.

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 in the first line, followed by short, distinct operational lines for endpoint, scopes, idempotency, and workspace override. Each sentence carries separate information; the auth/sensitivity lines are boilerplate but not redundant.

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?

The definition covers auth, idempotency, and workspace scoping well, and an output schema exists so return values need not be described. But for a tool annotated destructiveHint=true with a 5-parameter nested schema, the unexplained side effects and the undocumented sampleSize leave meaningful gaps for an agent deciding whether and how to call it.

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 60%, and the description does explain the two workspace-override parameters and the idempotency key in prose. It says nothing about the nested body.sampleSize (1-20, default 3), which the schema also leaves undocumented, so the most semantically interesting non-required input remains unclarified.

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?

"Refresh broadcast recipient and sample-message preview" gives a specific verb (refresh) and resource (broadcast preview), plus the underlying POST /api/broadcasts/{id}/preview endpoint. This distinguishes it from siblings like luca_broadcasts_get or luca_broadcasts_launch, though it never explicitly names an alternative.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

The description contains no when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance: it does not say whether preview is a prerequisite for launch/approve, or how it differs from get. The only conditional instructions concern parameter plumbing (idempotency key, workspace override), not tool selection.

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