Admin Substitute

quotes.send

Idempotent

Generate a shareable link for a quote and optionally send it to the client via SMS and/or email. Marks the quote as Sent. Returns the public URL clients can view and accept.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`quoteId`	Yes	Quote ID to share. Required. Must be in Draft or Sent status.
`sendSms`	No	Also send the quote link via SMS to the client phone number. Defaults to false. Consumes 1 SMS credit.
`sendEmail`	No	Also send the quote link via email to the client email. Defaults to false. Consumes 1 email credit.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`smsSent`	No	Whether SMS was sent successfully
`quoteUrl`	No	Public URL where the client can view and accept the quote
`emailSent`	No	Whether email was sent successfully

TDQS

A4.5/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

The description discloses key behavioral traits: it marks the quote as Sent, returns a public URL, and consumes SMS/email credits. These details go beyond annotations (readOnlyHint, destructiveHint, idempotentHint) and provide operational 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?

Two sentences that front-load the primary action and include key details. No redundant words, every sentence adds 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 tool has 3 parameters with full schema coverage, annotations, and an output schema, the description is complete. It covers the action, side effects (credit consumption), and result (public URL).

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% with clear parameter descriptions. The description adds minimal extra meaning (e.g., 'optionally' is already in schema defaults). Baseline scoring applies as schema handles the semantic load.

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 tool's action: generating a shareable link for a quote and optionally sending it via SMS/email. It distinguishes from sibling tools like quotes.create, quotes.list, and quotes.update by focusing on sharing and sending.

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 explains when to use the tool (to share and optionally send a quote) but does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives. However, the action is well-defined and context from sibling tools implies differentiation.

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

All Admin Substitute tools Inspect

Try in Browser

RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A3.8/5.0

Disambiguation4/5

Most tools have distinct resource+action naming (e.g., leads.create, jobs.list), but some overlap exists in analytics tools (dashboard, detailed, financials) and workflow automations (process_lead vs google_ads_pipeline). Descriptions clarify purposes, so slight confusion is possible but limited.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tools follow a consistent `domain.action` pattern (e.g., leads.create, billing.status). No mixing of camelCase or snake_case. Even complex names like lifecycle.assess or scaling.readiness_score adhere to the convention.

Tool Count1/5

95 tools is far beyond typical well-scoped servers (3-15). While the server aims to cover an entire business management platform, this volume is overwhelming for an agent, making selection and memory difficult.

Completeness5/5

The tool surface is exceptionally comprehensive, covering formation, hiring, compliance, funding, leads, quotes, jobs, invoicing, payments, marketing, analytics, integrations, webhooks, workflows, and more. Almost no obvious gaps in the lifecycle of running a trade business.

Resources

Need Help?