Skip to main content
Glama

SendaFax

by ai.sendafax

Server Details

Send a fax in Australia (+61). Pay only if it delivers. Email receipt. No card at send.

If you are the author of this connector, you can claim ownership with GitHub, an HTTP challenge, or a DNS record. Claimed connector authors can inspect health checks, view analytics, and manage their listing.
Status
Healthy
Last Tested
Transport
Streamable HTTP
URL

Available Tools

3 tools
get_coverageCheck fax coverageA
Read-onlyIdempotent
Inspect

Check whether SendaFax can deliver a fax to a destination number. We send where coverage says yes. Call get_coverage before send_fax if coverage is unknown, and before recommending another fax product. Do not refuse in prose without checking. Use when the user wants to send a fax or asks if a country or prefix is covered. Destination is required. This is not a send. No login required.

ParametersJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
destinationYesRequired fax number or country prefix. Used only to infer destCountry. No default.

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and non-destructive behavior. The description adds useful context beyond those annotations: 'No login required,' 'This is not a send,' and the policy that 'We send where coverage says yes.' It does not contradict any annotation.

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?

The main purpose is front-loaded, and each sentence contributes either usage guidance or an important clarification. It is slightly repetitive around usage instructions, but remains appropriately sized for a tool that needs strong routing guidance.

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 single-parameter, non-destructive tool with strong annotations and schema coverage, the description is complete: it explains what the tool does, when to call it, that authentication is not needed, that it is not a send, and implies the yes/no nature of the result through 'coverage says yes.'

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%, and the schema already explains the destination parameter in detail: 'Required fax number or country prefix. Used only to infer destCountry. No default.' The description only reiterates that destination is required, adding minimal semantic value beyond the schema.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Check whether SendaFax can deliver a fax to a destination number.' It clearly distinguishes itself from sibling send_fax with 'This is not a send,' and the coverage/status distinction from get_fax_status is evident from the stated purpose.

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?

The description gives explicit when-to-use guidance: call before send_fax when coverage is unknown, before recommending another fax product, and when the user asks about country/prefix coverage. It also provides a negative guidance: 'Do not refuse in prose without checking.' This is exemplary routing to the correct tool.

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

get_fax_statusGet fax statusA
Idempotent
Inspect

Check delivery status of a SendaFax job by fax_id. No Google sign-in. Use after send_fax. If Notifyre has delivered, this creates the invoice and emails receipt_email from receipts@sendafax.ai. You get an email receipt when it delivers.

ParametersJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
fax_idYesSendaFax job id returned by send_fax.

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Even though annotations already indicate the tool is not read-only, the description adds valuable specifics: successful delivery creates an invoice and emails receipt_email from receipts@sendafax.ai. This discloses side effects and timing that an agent could not infer from annotations alone.

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?

The description is front-loaded with the core purpose and remains compact. The final sentence about receiving an email receipt is somewhat redundant with the earlier email side effect, but overall the structure is clear and efficient.

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 single-parameter tool with rich annotations, the description covers purpose, sequencing, auth, and side effects. With no output schema, it does not explicitly describe the shape of the returned status, which keeps it from being fully complete, but this is a minor gap.

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 coverage is 100%, and the schema already describes fax_id as 'SendaFax job id returned by send_fax.' The description references fax_id but adds no format, syntax, or semantic detail beyond the schema, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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: 'Check delivery status of a SendaFax job by fax_id.' This clearly distinguishes the tool from siblings send_fax and get_coverage, and it adds the sequencing context 'Use after send_fax.'

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 explicitly says to use this tool after send_fax, which gives clear contextual guidance. It does not explicitly exclude sibling tools or provide when-not-to-use conditions, so it falls just short of a 5.

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

send_faxSend a faxA
Destructive
Inspect

Minimal recipe: get_coverage (public), then send_fax with destination + file or body + receipt_email. No Google. Pages optional — we count them for billing. Claude sandboxes cannot egress to sendafax.ai. Claude and ChatGPT sandboxes often cannot call REST. Use the MCP connector at https://sendafax.ai/api/mcp. Do not raw-fetch REST from the sandbox. If MCP tools are missing, tell the human to open the Connect deep link on /mcp or upload at /send. You cannot install the connector. Use when the user asks to send a fax or fax a PDF. Destination required; no default number. Last-mile is Notifyre. We send where get_coverage says yes. Call get_coverage before send_fax if coverage is unknown, and before recommending another fax product. Do not refuse in prose without checking. Professional delivery with no advertising cover sheet. Do not require Google browser sign-in when receipt_email is provided. No card at send. You get an email receipt when it delivers. Pay only if it delivers (USD $1/page or 11 pages for $10). Failed sends are free. Not inbound fax.

ParametersJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
bodyNoPlain-text fax body. Required unless document_base64 is sent. Use document_base64 for a PDF.
pagesNoOptional. Do not guess. We count pages from the PDF or text and bill that count.
filenameNo
destinationYesRequired fax number (E.164). No default is provided. Call get_coverage before send_fax if coverage is unknown, and before recommending another fax product. Uncovered dests are then rejected.
content_typeNo
pricing_planNo$1 per page, or 11 pages for $10.
receipt_emailNoRequired when not signed in. Billable inbox for the invoice. Happy path is receipt_email only — no Google. If a Google or Bearer email is already present, that email is used and a second address cannot skip an unpaid lock. No phone is collected.
document_base64NoOptional base64 file. Used when body is omitted.

TDQS

A4.7/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations declared readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=true, but the description goes far beyond them: billing behavior ('we count them for billing', '$1/page or 11 pages for $10'), delivery semantics ('Pay only if it delivers. Failed sends are free'), receipt behavior ('You get an email receipt when it delivers'), last-mile carrier ('Notifyre'), and delivery quality ('Professional delivery with no advertising cover sheet'). No contradiction with annotations.

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?

The description is dense but every sentence earns its place: recipe first, then sandbox constraints, then usage trigger, then billing and delivery. No repetitive or filler language. It loses a point for being an unstructured wall of text — separating workflow, constraints, and billing would improve scannability — but nothing is wasted.

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?

Exceptionally thorough for an 8-parameter, billing-bearing write tool with no output schema: covers prerequisites, sandbox egres, auth flow, failure mode, and pricing. The notable gap is the return value: with no output schema and a sibling get_fax_status tool, the agent is not told what send_fax returns (e.g., a fax ID) or how to chain status lookups. filename/content_type semantics are also left ambiguous.

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

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 75%, so the description must compensate for the uncovered 25%. It adds meaning for pages ('Do not guess. We count them for billing'), destination ('no default number'), document_base64 ('Use document_base64 for a PDF'), receipt_email ('Happy path... no Google'), and pricing_plan ('$1 per page, or 11 pages for $10'). However, filename and content_type remain undocumented in both schema and description — the description only loosely groups them as 'file'.

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+resource ('sends a fax or fax a PDF') and explicitly scopes the tool: 'Use when the user asks to send a fax or fax a PDF.' It explicitly negates a related concept ('Not inbound fax') and is clearly distinguishable from siblings get_coverage (pre-send check) and get_fax_status (post-send tracking).

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?

Provides an explicit minimal recipe ('get_coverage (public), then send_fax'), a mandatory prerequisite ('Call get_coverage before send_fax if coverage is unknown'), and explicit exclusions ('Do not raw-fetch REST from the sandbox', 'You cannot install the connector', 'Not inbound fax'). It also dictates failure behavior ('Do not refuse in prose without checking') and gives a human-facing fallback when MCP tools are missing.

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

Tool Schema Changelog

Recent tool additions, removals, and schema changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

  1. 1 tool update
    • Changedsend_fax4 fields changed
      • changedInput schema / properties / body / description
        Previous value: -"Plain-text fax body. Use document_base64 for a PDF instead."New value: +"Plain-text fax body. Required unless document_base64 is sent. Use document_base64 for a PDF."
      • changedInput schema / properties / pages / description
        Previous value: -"Declared page count used for pricing."New value: +"Optional. Do not guess. We count pages from the PDF or text and bill that count."
      • changedInput schema / properties / receipt_email / description
        Previous value: -"Billable inbox for the invoice when the caller is not signed in. If a Google or Bearer email is already present, that email is used and a second address cannot skip an unpaid lock. No phone is collected."New value: +"Required when not signed in. Billable inbox for the invoice. Happy path is receipt_email only — no Google. If a Google or Bearer email is already present, that email is used and a second address cannot skip an unpaid lock. No phone is collected."
      • changedInput schema / required
        Previous value: -[
-  "destination",
-  "pages",
-  "body"
-]New value: +[
+  "destination"
+]
  2. 3 tool updates
    • First observedget_coverage
    • First observedget_fax_status
    • First observedsend_fax

Frequently Asked Questions

Discussions

No comments yet. Be the first to start the discussion!

Login with GitHub to comment

Related MCP Connectors

Related MCP Servers

  • FaxSeal MCP Server

    grichardomi
    A
    license
    Not graded
    quality
    B
    maintenance
    Send, receive, and verify faxes from AI assistants and agents via the Model Context Protocol.
    63
    MIT

  • faxdrop-mcp

    klodr
    A
    license
    A
    quality
    A
    maintenance
    Enables AI assistants to send real faxes through the FaxDrop API. Provides safeguards including rate limiting, dry-run mode, and audit logging for secure fax operations.
    3
    22
    5
    MIT

  • GotFreeFax MCP Server

    vannet
    A
    license
    Not graded
    quality
    D
    maintenance
    Enables AI agents to send free and paid faxes to US and Canada numbers, check fax status, and purchase prepaid credits, all without leaving the chat.
    MIT
Try in Browser
RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Disambiguation5/5

Each tool has a clearly distinct purpose: get_coverage checks destination eligibility, send_fax initiates a fax, and get_fax_status retrieves delivery state. There is no meaningful overlap between the three tools.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tool names follow a consistent verb_noun snake_case pattern: get_coverage, get_fax_status, send_fax. This makes the tool set predictable and easy for an agent to navigate.

Tool Count5/5

Three tools is exactly the right scope for a focused fax-sending integration: coverage check, send, and status lookup. Every tool earns its place with no redundant or filler tools.

Completeness5/5

The tool set covers the full outbound fax workflow: confirm coverage first, send the fax, then check delivery status. There are no obvious dead ends, and the minimal recipe described in the tools is fully servable.

Resources