Skip to main content
Glama
thinhost

thinhost-mcp

Official
by thinhost
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Hybrid

send_email

Send transactional emails like sign-in links, receipts, or alerts through thin.host, using a verified sending domain. Not for marketing or bulk sends.

Instructions

Send a single transactional notification email (e.g. a sign-in link, receipt, or alert).

PRECONDITION — this only works for accounts thin.host has approved for email AND when the 'from' address uses a verified sending domain. There is no self-serve:

  • Unapproved accounts get error_code "email_not_enabled".

  • A 'from' address on an unverified/unapproved domain gets "invalid_from_domain". In both cases the returned suggested_next_tool_call explains how to get approved or which sending domain to use. Do NOT retry blindly — surface that guidance to the user.

Omit 'from_address' to send from the account's default verified sender (recommended). Provide at least one of 'text' or 'html'. This is transactional only — do not use it for marketing or bulk sends.

Args: to: Recipient email address subject: Email subject line text: Plain-text body (provide this and/or html) html: HTML body (provide this and/or text) from_address: Optional sender; must be on a verified sending domain. Omit for the default. reply_to: Optional Reply-To address

Returns: id: The provider message ID for the accepted send status: "sent" when the message was accepted for delivery to: The recipient the message was sent to from_address: The sender the message was sent from

On failure returns the standard agent error shape (error_code, error_message, agent_should_retry, suggested_next_tool_call). Common error_codes: email_not_enabled, invalid_from_domain, recipient_suppressed (prior bounce/complaint — do not retry), rate_limited (retryable after the window resets), invalid_to, missing_subject, empty_body.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
toYes
htmlNo
textNo
subjectYes
reply_toNo
from_addressNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.1.0

TDQS

A5/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden and does so thoroughly: approval requirements, verified sender domain constraints, specific error codes, retryability, and recipient_suppressed non-retry behavior. It also describes the success and failure return shapes.

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 definition is long but well structured and front-loaded: purpose, precondition, arguments, returns, and common errors. Every section adds actionable information for correct invocation, and there is little waste.

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

Completeness5/5

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

For a six-parameter mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is complete. It covers prerequisites, parameter semantics, return values, failure modes, and retry guidance.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters5/5

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 for all six parameters, and it does. It documents each argument, explains the text/html requirement, the verified-domain constraint on from_address, and the recommended default-sender omission.

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: send a single transactional notification email, with examples. It also explicitly excludes marketing or bulk sends, making the intended use unmistakable.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

It gives explicit preconditions, when the tool will fail, and what to do instead of retrying blindly. It also specifies the recommended way to omit from_address and requires at least one of text or html.

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