Conduit Agentic Commerce

Email a supplier or carrier

agent_outreach

Idempotent

Email outside addresses (suppliers, carriers). to is a string email, { email }, or { emails } (max 5). Not to=all and not a Hub user_id / role — those are agent_notify. Linked agents set Reply-To to an org member (default OWNER). No action buttons. Channel is email.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`to`	Yes	Outside address(es): a string email, { email }, or { emails } (max 5). Not to=all and not a Hub user_id / role — those are agent_notify.
`body`	Yes	Plain-text body, max 4000 characters. URLs stay escaped text, not buttons.
`title`	Yes	Subject line, max 120 characters
`channel`	No	Delivery channel. Email only — omit or pass email
`dry_run`	No	If true, resolve recipients and from-address without sending or storing
`agent_id`	Yes	Authenticated agent sending the note
`order_id`	No	Optional order correlation
`reply_to`	No	Linked only: who receives replies. { email } or { role } matching a member. Omit to default to the OWNER. Unlinked agents have no Reply-To.
`search_id`	No	Optional search correlation
`session_token`	No	Session token from agent_authenticate — required whenever agent_id is passed
`idempotency_key`	No	Replay key — same agent + key returns the original outreach_id without sending again

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`from`	No
`hint`	No
`next`	No
`error`	No
`detail`	No
`failed`	No
`channel`	No
`dry_run`	No
`reply_to`	No
`delivered`	No
`recipients`	No
`outreach_id`	No
`idempotent_replay`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed2 schema fields changedSep 24, 2026
- addedOutput schema / properties / next / properties / args / additionalProperties / anyOf
```
Added value: +[
+  {
+    "type": "string"
+  },
+  {
+    "type": "number"
+  },
+  {
+    "type": "boolean"
+  }
+]
```
- removedOutput schema / properties / next / properties / args / additionalProperties / type
```
Removed value: -"string"
```
Changed2 schema fields changedAug 29, 2026
- removedOutput schema / properties / idempotentReplay
```
Removed value: -{
-  "type": "boolean"
-}
```
- addedOutput schema / properties / idempotent_replay
```
Added value: +{
+  "type": "boolean"
+}
```
AddedAug 28, 2026

TDQS

A4.6/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already cover readOnly, destructive, openWorld, and idempotent hints. The description adds beyond them by disclosing that emails have 'No action buttons' and that linked agents' Reply-To defaults to OWNER. This enriches the agent's mental model of the side effects without contradicting any annotation.

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?

Four short, dense sentences cover purpose, recipient constraints, sibling differentiation, and Reply-To behavior. Every sentence earns its place; no filler or redundancy. The critical caveat about agent_notify is front-loaded for immediate decision-making.

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 schema describes all 11 parameters and the output schema exists, the description doesn't need to explain default return shapes or every field. It covers the essential usage decision (external vs internal recipients) and a couple of behavioral nuances. Minor gaps like how to identify a 'linked agent' are already addressed in the schema's reply_to description, so completeness is high.

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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds value by summarizing the accepted `to` formats ('string email, { email }, or { emails } (max 5)') and explicitly excluding internal Hub identifiers, reducing misuse risk. It does not re-document every parameter but highlights the most error-prone one effectively.

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 states a specific verb and resource: 'Email outside addresses (suppliers, carriers)'. It explicitly contrasts with agent_notify for internal messages, making the tool's scope crystal clear and differentiating it from its most similar sibling.

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 explicit when-to-use vs when-not-to-use guidance: 'Not to=all and not a Hub user_id / role — those are agent_notify.' It also clarifies the recipient format constraints (max 5, outside addresses only) and Reply-To behavior, leaving no ambiguity about invocation conditions.

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

All Conduit Agentic Commerce 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?