Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
arbeitsagentur-mcp

arbeitsagentur-mcp

by slopmaxxer
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

meineba_postfach_send

Send a message to Agentur für Arbeit or Jobcenter through your Postfach; preview first, then confirm to submit binding communication recorded in your case file.

Instructions

Send a message to the Agentur für Arbeit / Jobcenter through the user's Postfach.

Without confirm=true this only returns a preview. Sent messages are binding communication with the authority and are recorded in the local case file.

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": {
      "recipient_id": "<recipient_id>",
      "recipient_name": "<recipient_name>",
      "topic": "<topic>",
      "subject": "<subject>",
      "text": "<text>"
    },
    "name": "meineba_postfach_send"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
textYes
topicYes'bezug' of the chosen topic/subtopic from meineba_postfach_recipients
confirmNoMust be true to actually send. Only set it after the user has seen and approved this exact message.
subjectYes
recipient_idYesdienststellenNummer from meineba_postfach_recipients
recipient_nameYesdienststellenName from meineba_postfach_recipients

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already cover write (readOnlyHint=false), non-destructive, open-world framing. The description adds genuinely new behavioral context: the preview-vs-send two-phase flow and the fact that sent messages are binding and persisted to the local case file. It omits auth requirements and error behavior, so not a 5.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Three short sentences with the core action front-loaded, then the preview/send distinction, then the consequence. No filler and nothing buried.

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 send tool with an output schema (which carries the preview payload) and annotations covering the write profile, the description supplies the confirmation protocol and side-effect note an agent needs. It leaves the sourcing of recipient_id/topic fields to the schema descriptions, which are present.

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 67% and the schema already explains confirm ('Must be true to actually send'), topic, recipient_id and recipient_name. The description's only parameter-relevant content restates the confirm flag, adding no format or sourcing detail for text/subject beyond the schema. Baseline 3 fits.

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?

States a specific verb ('Send a message') and resource ('through the user's Postfach') with the target authority named. It implicitly separates itself from read-side siblings like meineba_postfach_read and meineba_postfach, but never names them explicitly, so it lands short of a 5.

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?

The confirm=true gating gives a clear when/when-not: without it the call is a harmless preview, with it the message is actually sent. It stops short of naming alternative tools or stating prerequisites such as login state or required recipient lookup via meineba_postfach_recipients.

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