Conecto

Email a purchase order

purchasing_send_order

Email an order to the supplier in the business's name, with a link to its PDF. A draft takes the next number first (PO-0001 on, without gaps), its PDF is made and kept in the file store, and it no longer changes; a failed email numbers nothing. An order already sent is emailed again (to to, if given). Needs the business's name for documents (invoices_set_profile legal_name) and, for anyone outside the business, a paid account. To record an order as sent without emailing it, use purchasing_update_order with mark_sent ($0.01). Costs $0.10 per call; nothing if it fails.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "order": "<order>"
    },
    "name": "purchasing_send_order"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`to`	No	Send to this address instead of the supplier's email.
`order`	Yes	The order_id, or the order's number like "PO-0007".
`message`	No	A short note in the email, e.g. "Please deliver to the back door."

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedOct 28, 2026

TDQS

A4.5/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Goes well beyond the annotations (readOnlyHint=false, openWorldHint=true, idempotentHint=false) by disclosing the side effects: a draft consumes the next sequential number (PO-0001 onward), its PDF is persisted to the file store, the order becomes immutable, and a failed email consumes no number. It also discloses cost ($0.10 per call, nothing on failure) and that re-sends go to `to` if supplied — exactly the mutation context annotations can't convey.

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-loaded with purpose and dense but purposeful throughout; each clause (numbering, immutability, cost, prerequisite) carries distinct information. It is heavily parenthetical, which slightly slows parsing, keeping it from a 5.

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?

With no output schema, the description covers prerequisites, side effects, failure behavior and cost, which is nearly everything an agent needs. It does not state what a successful call returns (e.g., the assigned number or the send status), a modest gap for a send-and-number operation.

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 description coverage is 100%, so `to`, `order`, and `message` are already documented, and the description mostly restates them. It adds only marginal meaning — that `to` acts as the resend override when an order was already emailed — so the baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 ('Email an order to the supplier') plus key mechanics (business's name, PDF link). It clearly separates the tool from purchasing_update_order with mark_sent, which does the same thing without emailing, so an agent can tell them apart without opening either schema.

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?

Names an explicit alternative ('To record an order as sent without emailing it, use purchasing_update_order with mark_sent') and states prerequisites (legal_name in invoices_set_profile, paid account for external recipients). It also covers the resend case ('An order already sent is emailed again'), leaving little to inference.

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

All Conecto 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?