Conduit Agentic Commerce

Can this supplier fill it

supply_availability

Read-onlyIdempotent

Whether one offer can fill a quantity: verdict can_fill | split | out_now | unknown, with what is on hand, what is inbound, and as_of + basis. Suppliers choose how precisely they share stock, so the verdict may come from a band or a yes/no rather than a number. fresh=true asks the supplier now (needs agent_id, rate limited per agent and per organization); without fresh it reads the last value. Call this before order_execute on any connector offer.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`fresh`	No	Ask the supplier now rather than reading the last value. Needs agent_id, and is rate limited per agent and per organization
`quote`	No	Also return the supplier's exact total with tax for this quantity, computed without saving anything. Needs agent_id and an account with the supplier
`agent_id`	No	Agent id. Required for fresh, and it is what reveals your negotiated prices
`quantity`	No	Quantity to fill (default 1)
`supply_id`	Yes	Offer supply id from supply_search / supply_details
`session_token`	No	Session token from agent_authenticate — required whenever agent_id is passed

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`hint`	No
`kind`	No
`next`	No
`unit`	No
`as_of`	No
`basis`	No
`error`	No
`quote`	No
`stock`	No
`detail`	No
`verdict`	No
`incoming`	No
`quantity`	No
`freshness`	No
`locations`	No
`supply_id`	No
`link_state`	No
`quote_error`	No
`fresh_refused`	No
`could_not_reach`	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"
```
AddedSep 20, 2026

TDQS

A4.5/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the readOnlyHint/idempotentHint annotations, the description discloses that supplier precision is variable, so the verdict may come from a band or yes/no rather than a number. It also explains the fresh/cached behavior, rate limiting, and the need for agent_id, adding genuine behavioral context.

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?

The description is three sentences with no wasted words. It front-loads the purpose and verdict, then adds behavioral nuance, then call timing. Every sentence contributes value.

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 presence of a full output schema, 100% parameter coverage, and annotations declaring read-only and idempotent behavior, the description is complete. It adds the critical usage context, cached-vs-fresh distinction, and rate-limit caveat that an agent needs to call the tool 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 the baseline is 3. The description reinforces fresh and agent_id semantics but does not add material parameter-level meaning beyond what the schema already states. No compensation is needed given full schema documentation.

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: whether one offer can fill a quantity, and enumerates the possible verdict values (can_fill | split | out_now | unknown). This clearly distinguishes the tool from siblings like supply_search or supply_details, which enumerate offers rather than judge fillability.

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?

The description gives explicit context: 'Call this before order_execute on any connector offer.' It also distinguishes fresh=true (ask now) from cached reads. It does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use the tool, but the primary timing guidance is strong.

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?