Skip to main content
Glama
thenavidm

Kit MCP Server

by thenavidm
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

Create a sequence email

create_sequence_email
Destructive

Add an email to a Kit sequence with subject, content, delay, and publish status; confirm=true is required for delivery or publishing changes.

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.
confirmNoMust be true for audience/delivery changes, publishing, destructive operations and signing-secret changes. Use only for an action requested by the user.
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_daysNoDays 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
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. First observedv2.0.1

TDQS

A3.5/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds real value beyond that by naming what can be affected ('delivery, audience membership, published data or irreversible state') and stating the confirm=true requirement, which is not in the 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?

Two short sentences, front-loaded with the action, followed immediately by risk and prerequisite. No filler and nothing that could be trimmed.

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, nested-object mutation with no output schema, the description is adequate but thin: it never clarifies the relationship between the top-level body flags and the payload/payload_file alternatives, nor does it point to sibling tools. Annotations and the rich schema carry most of the load, making this minimally viable.

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%, so all 14 parameters, including the nested payload fields, are already documented in the schema. The description adds only the confirm=true requirement, which the schema also states, so it does not meaningfully extend parameter meaning beyond the schema.

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 and resource ('Create a sequence email') that an agent can act on. It does not, however, distinguish this from close siblings such as create_sequence or update_sequence_email, so the purpose is clear but not differentiated.

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 gives no when-to-use guidance, no exclusions, and no alternatives despite the presence of update_sequence_email, get_sequence_email, and list_sequence_emails as siblings. The only operational hint is the confirm=true prerequisite, which is not framed as usage guidance.

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