Skip to main content
Glama
thenavidm

Flodesk MCP Server

by thenavidm
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

Create or update a subscriber.

create_or_update_subscriber
Destructive

Create or update a Flodesk subscriber record by email or ID with names, segments, custom fields, and opt-in details.

Instructions

Create or update a subscriber.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idNoThe subscriber's `id`. Either `email` or `id` must be included.
emailNoThe subscriber's `email`. Either `email` or `id` must be included.
accountNoExact configured private account profile label; not a tenant or provider account ID.
confirmNoMust be true for the requested mutation or exclusive private output file.
payloadNoComplete native JSON body; do not mix with body flags or payload_file. Arrays use repeated JSON object flags or a whole native array in a private file.
optin_ipNoIP address from which the subscriber confirmed their opt-in.
last_nameNoThe subscriber's last name.
first_nameNoThe subscriber's first name.
segment_idsNoThe segments this subscriber will be added to. Cap at `50`.
double_optinNoWhether or not to require the subscriber to confirm subscription via email. This option is only available to set with new subscriber creation. Default to `false` if not indicated.
payload_fileNoAbsolute regular non-symlink JSON body file, at most 1 MiB. Cannot mix with payload/body flags.
custom_fieldsNoAn object containing custom field data. E.g. ``` "favorite_color": "Lavender" ```.
optin_timestampNoThe date and time the subscribers confirmed their opt-in in ISO 8601 format. E.g. `2023-01-02T15:04:05.999Z`.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv2.0.0

TDQS

C2.1/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, idempotentHint=false, readOnlyHint=false, and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered structurally. The description adds nothing on top of that: no note about overwrite semantics on update, no mention that confirm=true is required for the mutation, and no disclosure of what data gets destroyed.

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

Conciseness2/5

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

The single four-word sentence is technically concise but is under-specification rather than conciseness for a 13-parameter destructive mutation tool. Nothing useful is front-loaded because there is nothing there to front-load.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness1/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a destructive, non-idempotent write tool with 13 parameters, nested payload objects, no output schema, and an XOR requirement on id/email, a one-line restatement of the title leaves the agent with essentially nothing beyond the structured fields. The description is completely inadequate for the tool's complexity.

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 100% across all 13 parameters, so the schema carries the full parameter burden and the baseline of 3 applies. The description contributes no additional meaning about the id/email XOR, the confirm flag, or the payload vs payload_file exclusivity.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose2/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

Tautological: description restates name/title.

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?

No guidance whatsoever on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It says nothing about when to prefer batch_create_or_update_subscribers, how it interacts with add_subscriber_to_segments, or what happens when an id/email already exists (create vs update resolution).

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