Skip to main content
Glama

agent-cold-email

by io.github.YS-projectcalc

remove_mailboxes

Destructive

Downgrade: release your N NEWEST live mailboxes now and lower the billed quantity. Inputs: count, acknowledged (must be true — this is a quoted, irreversible-this-cycle consent: the release is immediate for provisioning but there is NO mid-cycle credit; the lower price takes effect next renewal, minimum 5 mailboxes / $99). Returns { releasedCount, failedCount, unreleased, billing, deduplicated } where billing is the new projected monthly. releasedCount is what COMPLETED and can be less than the count you asked for; failedCount is how many the provider refused, which are STILL LIVE and still billed, and unreleased names those addresses — read them before concluding a downgrade landed. deduplicated: true means this call did NOT re-perform the downgrade — every count above describes an EARLIER call's already-recorded outcome under the same idempotencyKey, not new work done just now. This can be true even after the 30-day idempotency window itself has expired: the underlying release record persists independently, so a reused key still reports no re-release rather than silently starting a fresh one. count is RELATIVE — it releases that many MORE mailboxes, it does not set your fleet to that size — and release cannot be undone through this API, so ALWAYS pass an idempotencyKey: the FIRST call under a key resolves WHICH mailboxes to release and records that exact set, so every later call carrying the SAME key can only ever finish that same set. A same-key retry re-attempts the stragglers and can never release a mailbox outside them, whatever count you send with it (the recorded set wins over a changed count); a retry WITHOUT a key always releases another count. A genuine SECOND downgrade is therefore a NEW key — reusing an old one can only ever finish what that key already asked for. A call that came back with failedCount above zero did NOT finish, so its key is not frozen: resend the identical request with the same key until failedCount is 0 — from then on that key replays the finished result and releases nothing further. If a call returns 409 a release is already running for this account: wait, then re-read infrastructure_status before deciding whether to retry. To ADD mailboxes use setup_infrastructure / configure_byo_domain (request_managed_mailboxes).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
countYes
acknowledgedYes
idempotencyKeyNoOptional idempotency key: resend the SAME key when retrying this call so a dropped-response retry is not applied twice (no duplicate campaign/provision/send).

Schema Changelog

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

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / idempotencyKey
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Optional idempotency key: resend the SAME key when retrying this call so a dropped-response retry is not applied twice (no duplicate campaign/provision/send).",
+  "maxLength": 200,
+  "minLength": 1,
+  "type": "string"
+}
  2. Added

TDQS

A4.9/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

The description goes far beyond the destructiveHint annotation. It discloses that the release is irreversible, immediate for provisioning but no mid-cycle credit, that releasedCount can be less than requested, that failedCount mailboxes remain live and billed, that deduplicated means no re-release, and that idempotency keys freeze the mailbox set. This is exemplary transparency for a destructive operation.

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 long but every sentence earns its place given the complexity of the operation. It is front-loaded with the core purpose and then systematically covers return values, idempotency, retries, and error handling. Slightly verbose but justified for a destructive, irreversible operation with subtle idempotency semantics.

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?

Given the tool's complexity (destructive, irreversible, idempotency, partial failures, billing implications) and the lack of an output schema, the description is remarkably complete. It explains all return fields (releasedCount, failedCount, unreleased, billing, deduplicated), error handling (409), and edge cases (deduplicated after 30-day window). No gaps identified.

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 coverage is only 33% (only idempotencyKey has a description), but the description compensates richly. It explains count is RELATIVE (releases that many more, not sets fleet size), acknowledged must be true and is a consent, and idempotencyKey semantics are fully detailed (first call resolves set, retries finish stragglers, new key for second downgrade). This far exceeds what the schema provides.

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 purpose: 'Downgrade: release your N NEWEST live mailboxes now and lower the billed quantity.' It specifies the verb (release/downgrade), the resource (mailboxes), and the scope (N newest, relative count). It also distinguishes from siblings by explicitly noting 'To ADD mailboxes use setup_infrastructure / configure_byo_domain (request_managed_mailboxes).'

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 provides extensive usage guidance: when to use (downgrade), when not to (adding mailboxes), prerequisites (acknowledged must be true, minimum 5 mailboxes/$99), and alternatives (setup_infrastructure, configure_byo_domain). It also explains retry behavior, idempotency key usage, and 409 handling, which is critical for correct invocation.

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