sota-agw-mcp

Soạn nháp email

draft_create

Creates an unsent email draft with recipients, subject, body, CC, reply reference, and workdir attachment paths so users can review it before invoking a separate send action.

Instructions

Lưu nháp email (chưa gửi). to/cc: nhiều địa chỉ ngăn bằng dấu phẩy. attachments: đường dẫn trong workdir. Cho người dùng xem nháp; chỉ gọi draft_send khi người dùng muốn gửi.

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": {
      "to": "<to>",
      "subject": "<subject>",
      "body": "<body>"
    },
    "name": "draft_create"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`cc`	No
`to`	Yes
`body`	Yes
`subject`	Yes
`attachments`	No
`in_reply_to`	No

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.11.0Nov 9, 2026

TDQS

A4.2/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

With annotations declaring a non-read-only, non-destructive, closed-world operation, the description adds useful context: the draft is not sent, attachments must be paths within the workdir, and the user should review the draft before any send action. It does not describe overwrite or validation behavior, but the safety profile is already covered by annotations.

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?

The description is two compact sentences. It front-loads the purpose and then adds only the parameter syntax and workflow details that matter, with no wasted wording.

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 six-parameter draft-creation tool with an output schema, the description covers the essential purpose, key parameter formatting, and the review-before-send workflow. It is not fully complete because in_reply_to and the simple subject/body fields are not explained, but the core operational context is 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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It explains that to/cc accept multiple comma-separated addresses and that attachments are workdir-relative paths, but it leaves subject, body, and in_reply_to undocumented, so compensation is only partial.

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?

The description states a specific verb and resource: "Lưu nháp email" (save email draft), and immediately clarifies "chưa gửi" (not sent). It also explicitly distinguishes the tool from the sibling draft_send by saying to call draft_send only when the user wants to send.

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 description gives a clear post-creation workflow: show the draft to the user and only call draft_send when the user wants to send. This routes the agent to the correct next tool, though it does not spell out exclusions such as when not to create a draft versus using another compose path.

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

Deploy Server