User Intuition

Submit Feasibility Request

submit_feasibility_request

Submit a low-incidence, large, or specialized audience for manual feasibility review when direct panel launch is unavailable. This creates a review request, not a paid launch. Provide the target audience, target count, and incidence rate in percentage points; optionally link an accessible study. Use list_feasibility_requests or get_feasibility_request to follow its status.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`target`	Yes
`study_id`	No
`country_code`	No
`incident_rate`	Yes
`organization_id`	No	Platform admins only: select an organization for this operation. Required when changing another organization’s study or using its wallet.
`target_audience`	Yes

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes	The submitted feasibility request.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedOct 1, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / organization_id

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Platform admins only: select an organization for this operation. Required when changing another organization’s study or using its wallet.",
+  "maxLength": 128,
+  "minLength": 1,
+  "type": "string"
+}

Changed18 schema fields changedSep 30, 2026
- changedInput schema / $schema
```
Previous value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"New value: +"https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema"
```
- removedInput schema / additionalProperties
```
Removed value: -false
```
- addedInput schema / properties / study_id / pattern
```
Added value: +"^([0-9a-fA-F]{8}-[0-9a-fA-F]{4}-[1-8][0-9a-fA-F]{3}-[89abAB][0-9a-fA-F]{3}-[0-9a-fA-F]{12}|00000000-0000-0000-0000-000000000000|ffffffff-ffff-ffff-ffff-ffffffffffff)$"
```
- addedInput schema / properties / target / maximum
```
Added value: +9007199254740991
```
- changedOutput schema / $schema
```
Previous value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"New value: +"https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema"
```
- changedOutput schema / properties / result / additionalProperties
```
Previous value: -trueNew value: +{}
```
- removedOutput schema / properties / result / properties / cancelled_at / $ref
```
Removed value: -"#/properties/result/properties/responded_at"
```
- addedOutput schema / properties / result / properties / cancelled_at / description
```
Added value: +"ISO 8601 timestamp."
```
- addedOutput schema / properties / result / properties / cancelled_at / type
```
Added value: +[
+  "string",
+  "null"
+]
```
- removedOutput schema / properties / result / properties / estimated_timeline_hours / $ref
```
Removed value: -"#/properties/result/properties/estimated_total_cost_per_interview_usd"
```
- addedOutput schema / properties / result / properties / estimated_timeline_hours / type
```
Added value: +[
+  "number",
+  "null"
+]
```
- removedOutput schema / properties / result / properties / estimated_total_cost_usd / $ref
```
Removed value: -"#/properties/result/properties/estimated_total_cost_per_interview_usd"
```
- addedOutput schema / properties / result / properties / estimated_total_cost_usd / type
```
Added value: +[
+  "number",
+  "null"
+]
```
- removedOutput schema / properties / result / properties / expected_response_by / $ref
```
Removed value: -"#/properties/result/properties/responded_at"
```
- addedOutput schema / properties / result / properties / expected_response_by / description
```
Added value: +"ISO 8601 timestamp."
```
- addedOutput schema / properties / result / properties / expected_response_by / type
```
Added value: +[
+  "string",
+  "null"
+]
```
- addedOutput schema / properties / result / properties / target / maximum
```
Added value: +9007199254740991
```
- addedOutput schema / properties / result / properties / target / minimum
```
Added value: +-9007199254740991
```
First observedSep 30, 2026

TDQS

A4.8/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

The description adds context beyond annotations by explaining that this creates a review request, not a paid launch, and specifies the need for target audience, count, and incidence rate. Annotations already indicate non-destructive, open-world, non-idempotent behavior.

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?

Two sentences with no waste, front-loading the core purpose and then providing essential usage and parameter guidance.

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?

Given the complexity and the presence of an output schema, the description covers the main points but omits details about some parameters (like country_code) and doesn't explain return values, though output schema exists.

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 description explains the meaning of key parameters (target audience, target count, incidence rate in percentage points) and mentions an optional study link. However, with only 17% schema description coverage, it doesn't cover all parameters fully (e.g., country_code, organization_id).

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 verb 'Submit' and the resource 'audience for manual feasibility review,' distinguishing it from siblings like launch_panel. It also clarifies that this creates a review request rather than a paid launch.

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?

It explicitly states when to use this tool ('when direct panel launch is unavailable') and references alternative tools for checking status ('list_feasibility_requests or get_feasibility_request').

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

All User Intuition 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?