Skip to main content
Glama

agent-cold-email

by io.github.YS-projectcalc

configure_webhook

Destructive

Manage an outbound webhook subscription. action = create (needs url + eventTypes: reply|bounce|soft_bounce|complaint|unsubscribe; optional secret/active) | update (needs id + one changed field; active:true re-enables an auto-disabled one, active:false pauses; secret rotates) | delete (needs id). create/rotate return the HMAC signing secret ONCE. URLs must be https to a public host (private/metadata IPs rejected). Deliveries are signed X-Coldrig-Signature: sha256=HMAC-SHA256(secret, raw body).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idNoRequired for update/delete.
urlNoRequired for create. HTTPS endpoint; private/link-local/metadata IPs are rejected.
noteNoIgnored placeholder for symmetry; webhooks record no provenance note.
actionYes
activeNoOptional. On update, active:true re-enables an auto-disabled subscription; active:false pauses delivery.
secretNoOptional signing secret (>=16 chars). Omit on create to have one generated; pass on update to rotate.
eventTypesNoRequired for create: which events to push (reply | bounce | soft_bounce | complaint | unsubscribe).

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / eventTypes / description
      Previous value: -"Required for create: which events to push (reply | bounce | soft_bounce | complaint)."New value: +"Required for create: which events to push (reply | bounce | soft_bounce | complaint | unsubscribe)."
  2. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / eventTypes / items / enum
      Previous value: -[
-  "reply",
-  "bounce",
-  "soft_bounce",
-  "complaint"
-]New value: +[
+  "reply",
+  "bounce",
+  "soft_bounce",
+  "complaint",
+  "unsubscribe"
+]
    • changedInput schema / properties / eventTypes / maxItems
      Previous value: -4New value: +5
  3. Added

TDQS

A4.7/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the destructiveHint annotation, the description discloses that secrets are returned only once, URLs must be https to public hosts with private/metadata IPs rejected, and deliveries are signed with HMAC-SHA256. It also clarifies that the 'note' parameter is an ignored placeholder. This adds significant behavioral transparency.

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 description is dense but well-structured, using a pipe-delimited format to separate actions. Each sentence conveys actionable information: requirements, side effects, and security constraints. No redundant padding.

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 multi-action tool with seven parameters and no output schema, the description covers all necessary operational details: action-specific requirements, secret handling, URL constraints, signature scheme, and the re-enable/pause behavior. It is sufficiently complete for an agent to select and invoke correctly.

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?

The schema already describes most parameters (86% coverage), but the description adds operational semantics: how action determines required fields, that rotating secret is done via update, that active:false pauses, and that create/rotate returns the secret once. This enriches understanding 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 clearly states the tool's function: 'Manage an outbound webhook subscription' and enumerates the three actions (create, update, delete) with their specific conditions. This distinguishes it from sibling 'get_webhooks' which is presumably read-only.

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 provides explicit conditions for each action: create requires url + eventTypes, update requires id + one changed field, delete requires id. It explains special cases like active:true re-enabling and secret rotation. However, it doesn't explicitly contrast with alternatives, so it's clear context without exclusions.

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

All agent-cold-email toolsInspect
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

A4.4/5.0
Disambiguation4/5

Most tools have distinct purposes, but pause/pause_all and metrics/campaign_results/list_campaigns have overlapping scopes. Descriptions clarify the differences, so ambiguity is low.

Naming Consistency4/5

Uses snake_case with a mix of verb_noun (list_campaigns) and noun_verb (infrastructure_status), but patterns are predictable. Minor inconsistency between setup_infrastructure and infrastructure_status.

Tool Count4/5

25 tools is at the upper bound for a focused server, but the domain (cold email automation) justifies the number. Each tool covers a distinct aspect of the workflow.

Completeness4/5

Covers account management, campaigns, leads, threads, infrastructure, webhooks, and dashboards. Missing resume for paused campaigns and delete for campaigns, but core operations are present.

Resources