Skip to main content
Glama
thenavidm

Kit MCP Server

by thenavidm
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

Create a sequence email

create_sequence_email
Destructive

Create an email in a Kit sequence by setting its subject, delay, content, and publish status. Requires confirm=true for this irreversible action.

Instructions

Create a sequence email. May affect delivery, audience membership, published data or irreversible state. Requires confirm=true.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
accountNoNamed private account from KIT_ACCOUNTS. Defaults to KIT_DEFAULT_ACCOUNT or the first configured account.
confirmNoSet true only when the user asked for exactly this action.
contentNoHTML body content of the email
payloadNoComplete JSON body instead of individual body flags. Supports nullable fields and nested bulk structures. Cannot be combined with body flags or payload_file.
subjectNoSubject line of the email
positionNoZero-based position of the email in the sequence. Assigned automatically after the last email if omitted
publishedNoWhether the email is active and will be sent to subscribers. Defaults to `false` (draft)
send_daysNo
delay_unitNoUnit for the send delay. Use `days` for schedule-aware delivery, `hours` for a fixed hourly delay
delay_valueNoNumber of days or hours to wait before sending this email after the previous one
sequence_idYesPositive sequence id.
payload_fileNoLocal JSON request body file, at most 5 MB. Contents are validated before the API call and are never logged.
preview_textNoPreview text shown in email clients before the email is opened
email_template_idNoID of the email template to use for layout and styling

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed10 schema fields changedv3.0.0
    • addedInput schema / $defs
      Added value: +{
+  "send_days": {
+    "description": "Days of the week this email may be sent. Defaults to all 7 days (inherits the sequence schedule). Pass a subset to restrict delivery, or `null` to reset to all days",
+    "items": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "type": [
+      "array",
+      "null"
+    ]
+  }
+}
    • changedInput schema / properties / confirm / description
      Previous value: -"Must be true for audience/delivery changes, publishing, destructive operations and signing-secret changes. Use only for an action requested by the user."New value: +"Set true only when the user asked for exactly this action."
    • addedInput schema / properties / payload / properties / send_days / $ref
      Added value: +"#/$defs/send_days"
    • removedInput schema / properties / payload / properties / send_days / description
      Removed value: -"Days of the week this email may be sent. Defaults to all 7 days (inherits the sequence schedule). Pass a subset to restrict delivery, or `null` to reset to all days"
    • removedInput schema / properties / payload / properties / send_days / items
      Removed value: -{
-  "type": "string"
-}
    • removedInput schema / properties / payload / properties / send_days / type
      Removed value: -[
-  "array",
-  "null"
-]
    • addedInput schema / properties / send_days / $ref
      Added value: +"#/$defs/send_days"
    • removedInput schema / properties / send_days / description
      Removed value: -"Days of the week this email may be sent. Defaults to all 7 days (inherits the sequence schedule). Pass a subset to restrict delivery, or `null` to reset to all days"
    • removedInput schema / properties / send_days / items
      Removed value: -{
-  "type": "string"
-}
    • removedInput schema / properties / send_days / type
      Removed value: -[
-  "array",
-  "null"
-]
  2. First observedv2.0.1

TDQS

C2.7/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, idempotentHint=false, and openWorldHint=true, so the risk profile is covered structurally. The description adds some value by enumerating what may be affected (delivery, audience membership, published data, irreversible state) and restating the confirmation requirement. It does not contradict annotations, but adds little beyond them.

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?

Two short sentences, front-loaded with the core action and the risk/confirm constraint. Nothing is wasted, though brevity here is achieved partly by omitting needed context rather than by tight writing.

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?

For a 14-parameter mutation tool with a nested payload object and no output schema, the description is thin. The safety warning is present, but there is no explanation of the payload-vs-flags mutual exclusion, the draft-by-default behavior, or how this differs from updating an existing sequence email. The rich schema carries most of the load.

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 93%, so the schema already documents sequence_id, confirm, payload vs body-flag semantics, send_days, delay_unit, and published defaults. The description contributes no parameter-level meaning beyond the schema, making the baseline 3 appropriate.

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?

The description is essentially a verbatim restatement of the tool title: "Create a sequence email." It states a verb and resource, but adds nothing to distinguish this from siblings such as create_broadcast, create_sequence, or update_sequence_email. By the rubric this is a tautology that merely restates the 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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus update_sequence_email (edit an existing email), create_sequence (create the container), or create_broadcast (one-off send). The only directive is "Requires confirm=true," which is a precondition, not usage guidance. No exclusions or alternatives are named.

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