mcp-pushinator
Click on "Install Server".
Wait a few minutes for the server to deploy. Once ready, it will show a "Started" state.
In the chat, type
@followed by the MCP server name and your instructions, e.g., "@mcp-pushinatorsend a notification to my phone saying 'Meeting starts in 5 minutes'"
That's it! The server will respond to your query, and you can continue using it as needed.
Here is a step-by-step guide with screenshots.
Pushinator MCP
To install dependencies:
bun installTo build:
bun run buildAfter that, add the Pushinator MCP to your MCP client (the API token can be retrieved in your Pushinator API tokens page):
{
"mcpServers": {
"pushinator": {
"command": "node",
"args": ["path-to-repo/build/index.js"],
"env": {
"PUSHINATOR_API_KEY": "YOUR_PUSHINATOR_API_KEY"
}
}
}
}Available Tools
1 toolsend-notificationC
Send a notification via the Pushinator API
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| channel_id | Yes | UUID of the channel to send the notification to | |
| content | Yes | String content of the notification |
TDQS
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the action is to 'send' a notification, implying a write operation, but fails to mention critical aspects like authentication needs, rate limits, error handling, or what happens after sending (e.g., success confirmation). This leaves significant gaps in understanding the tool's behavior.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is a single, efficient sentence that directly states the tool's purpose without any wasted words. It is appropriately sized and front-loaded, making it easy to understand at a glance.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Given the complexity of a notification-sending tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is insufficient. It lacks details on behavioral traits (e.g., side effects, response format), usage context, and error handling, making it incomplete for effective agent use.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
The input schema has 100% description coverage, with clear documentation for both parameters (channel_id as UUID, content as string). The description adds no additional semantic context beyond what the schema provides, such as examples or constraints, so it meets the baseline for high schema coverage.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description clearly states the action ('send') and resource ('notification via the Pushinator API'), providing a specific verb+resource combination. However, with no sibling tools mentioned, it cannot demonstrate differentiation from alternatives, which prevents a perfect score.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool, such as prerequisites, typical scenarios, or limitations. It lacks any context about alternatives or exclusions, leaving usage entirely implicit.
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 tool update
v1.0.0- First observed
send-notification
TDQS
With only one tool, there is no possibility of confusion or overlap between tools. The tool's purpose is clearly defined as sending notifications via the Pushinator API, making it distinct by default.
Since there is only one tool, naming consistency is inherently perfect. The tool name 'send-notification' follows a clear verb-noun pattern, and there are no other tools to compare it against for inconsistency.
A single tool is generally too few for most server purposes, as it limits functionality and may indicate an incomplete or overly narrow scope. While it could be appropriate for a very simple notification service, it often feels thin and lacks the depth needed for typical agent workflows.
Inferring the domain as notification sending, the tool covers the core action of sending notifications. However, there are likely gaps such as managing notification settings, retrieving sent notifications, or handling errors, which could lead to incomplete workflows for agents.
Maintenance
Resources
Unclaimed servers have limited discoverability.
Looking for Admin?
If you are the server author, to access and configure the admin panel.
Related MCP Connectors
Push notifications for AI agents - send instant iPhone notifications from any MCP client.
- mcp-serverOAuthnet.vybit
Push notifications with personalized sounds - manage and trigger your vybits via MCP
MCP connector that lets ChatGPT list, search, and run your Apple Shortcuts via a local Mac agent
Automate 1,000+ services from any MCP-compatible AI agent: build Applets, run actions and queries.
Related MCP Servers
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityCmaintenancemacOS Notification MCP enables AI assistants to trigger native macOS sounds, visual notifications, and text-to-speech. Built for Claude and other AI models using the Model Context Protocol.37MIT
- AlicenseBqualityDmaintenanceEnables AI assistants to send push notifications to mobile devices via Pushover, allowing users to receive instant alerts for task completions, errors, reminders, and custom messages through their AI conversations.1202MIT
- FlicenseNot gradedqualityDmaintenanceMCP server for macOS native notifications with 67 AI brand icons and system sound support, enabling AI agents to send desktop notifications via one-line tool calls.-
- AlicenseBqualityCmaintenanceAn MCP server that lets LLM agents dispatch native OS notifications when a task finishes. It supports cross-platform desktop notifications, task tokens for updates, mobile bridges, and quiet hours.2MIT
Latest Blog Posts
- Who's Calling? MCP Hosts Are an Identity Blind Spot (And the Spec Knows It)By Om-Shree-0709 on .mcpAgent IdentityOAuth 2.1
- Your AI Chatbot Just Exposed Your CEO's Salary to an InternBy Om-Shree-0709 on .Agent IdentityMCP SecurityOAuth Delegation
- Why MCP Servers Need Execution Sandboxing (And Why Your Current Stack Isn't Enough)By Om-Shree-0709 on .Agentic AiPrompt InjectionWebAssembly
MCP directory API
We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.
curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/appricos/pushinator-mcp'
If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server