Onsa

List pending outreach

list_pending_outreach

Read-onlyIdempotent

Lists outreach messages the agent has drafted that are waiting for a human to approve - the 'a message for X is ready' queue. Each entry carries the draft text, the lead it is for, and why that lead scored as it did. Without campaignId, the list covers every campaign in this workspace that the user takes part in. Each entry has kind: first_message, or follow_up (a LinkedIn follow-up for someone who did not reply, carrying the message it follows up in followsUp). This tool sends nothing: rewrite_outreach replaces a draft's text, and send_outreach queues one for delivery.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`limit`	No	How many drafts to return (default 50)
`campaignId`	No	One campaign to limit the list to; when omitted, the list covers every campaign the user takes part in

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`total`	Yes
`pending`	Yes
`returned`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed2 schema fields changedOct 15, 2026

addedOutput schema / properties / pending / items / properties / followsUp

Added value: +{
+  "anyOf": [
+    {
+      "additionalProperties": {},
+      "properties": {
+        "sentAt": {
+          "anyOf": [
+            {
+              "type": "string"
+            },
+            {
+              "type": "null"
+            }
+          ]
+        },
+        "sentAtIsExact": {
+          "type": "boolean"
+        },
+        "text": {
+          "type": "string"
+        }
+      },
+      "required": [
+        "text",
+        "sentAt"
+      ],
+      "type": "object"
+    },
+    {
+      "type": "null"
+    }
+  ]
+}

addedOutput schema / properties / pending / items / properties / kind
```
Added value: +{
+  "type": "string"
+}
```

Changed1 schema field changedSep 27, 2026

changedInput schema / properties / campaignId / description

Previous value: -"Limit to one campaign; omit for every campaign you take part in"New value: +"One campaign to limit the list to; when omitted, the list covers every campaign the user takes part in"

First observedSep 8, 2026

TDQS

A4.2/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already establish readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false; the description adds real value by stating 'This tool sends nothing' and delineating what each entry contains (draft text, lead, scoring rationale, kind, followsUp). It does not discuss ordering, pagination, or approval workflow mechanics, but the safety profile is well reinforced.

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?

Front-loads the core purpose, then layers in scope, entry shape, and sibling routing in a compact four-sentence block. Dense but every sentence contributes; slight redundancy in re-explaining campaignId scope.

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?

With an output schema present, the description need not document return values, yet it still characterizes entry contents and the kind/followsUp semantics. Together with the annotations and full schema coverage, an agent has everything needed to call it correctly.

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%, so both limit and campaignId are already documented, and the description's campaignId scoping note largely restates the schema. Baseline 3 applies since the schema carries the parameter burden.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Lists outreach messages the agent has drafted waiting for a human to approve') and crystallizes it with a concrete mental model ('the a message for X is ready queue'). It also distinguishes itself from write siblings by naming rewrite_outreach and send_outreach.

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?

Explains the default scope when campaignId is omitted and routes the agent to rewrite_outreach and send_outreach with their distinct effects. It does not, however, contrast with other read siblings like list_next_steps or list_replies, so the when-to-use framing is clear but not fully exclusive.

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

All Onsa tools Inspect

Try in Browser

One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources

Need Help?