CRM Connector

Propose: Send an invoice or quote

propose_send_record

AI Agents (inside one system): Use when the person asks for this in a system whose AI agent may change records: An invoice or quote emailed to the customer by the person's own system, from its own email address. The customer receives it, and only the person can approve it. Give one item per record, at most 25. Nothing is written yet: the answer shows, per record, what it holds now and would hold after, plus a proposal id. Show it to the person, say so first when something would be sent to the people in their system, ask whether to go ahead, and only then call apply_proposal; when needsApproval is true, share the approve link instead. Not for reading (use search_records or get_record).

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": {
      "system": "<system>",
      "items": "<items>"
    },
    "name": "propose_send_record"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`items`	Yes	One object per record, at most 25.
`system`	Yes	Which AI agent: the system's id from get_ai_agent_options, or the name of the system or its connection. Ask the person which AI agent they mean unless they named it in this conversation; never pick one yourself.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`notice`	No
`changes`	Yes
`systemId`	Yes
`warnings`	Yes
`expiresAt`	Yes
`approveUrl`	Yes
`proposalId`	Yes
`systemName`	Yes
`needsApproval`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedNov 9, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / items / items / properties / reminder

Added value: +{
+  "description": "True to send the system's own payment reminder for an unpaid invoice instead of the invoice itself.",
+  "type": "boolean"
+}

Changed1 schema field changedNov 5, 2026

changedInput schema / properties / system / description

Previous value: -"Which AI agent: the system's id from get_ai_agents_info, or the name of the system or its connection. Ask the person which AI agent they mean unless they named it in this conversation; never pick one yourself."New value: +"Which AI agent: the system's id from get_ai_agent_options, or the name of the system or its connection. Ask the person which AI agent they mean unless they named it in this conversation; never pick one yourself."

AddedNov 5, 2026

TDQS

A4.2/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Beyond the annotations (which only say not read-only, not destructive, not idempotent, open-world), the description discloses the key behaviours: nothing is written yet, the response is a per-record before/after diff plus a proposal id, only the person can approve, results are capped at 25 items, and email actually leaves the system to the customer. It stops short of saying what happens on partial failure or whether proposals expire, but the essential safety context is present.

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?

Dense but front-loaded: what it does comes first, the confirmation workflow second, the exclusion last. Some clauses are tangled ("An invoice or quote emailed to the customer by the person's own system, from its own email address") and could be tightened, but no sentence is pure filler.

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?

Even though an output schema exists, the description explains the shape of the answer, the approval branch, and the item limit — everything an agent needs to call it and then route correctly between apply_proposal and the approve link. Nothing material is left unstated for a two-parameter proposal tool.

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 both top-level parameters and the nested item fields are already documented, which sets the baseline at 3. The description only restates the "one item per record, at most 25" constraint already in the schema and adds no meaning for the email or reminder fields.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb and resource: proposes sending an invoice or quote by email from the person's own system, and names itself as distinct from reading tools (search_records, get_record). It does not distinguish itself from the other send-flavoured siblings such as propose_send_document or propose_send_message, so an agent must still infer which send tool applies.

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?

Gives an explicit precondition (a system whose AI agent may change records), an explicit exclusion ("Not for reading (use search_records or get_record)"), and the full downstream workflow: show the result to the person, warn when something would be delivered to people in their system, ask, then call apply_proposal, or share the approve link when needsApproval is true. That is when-to-use, when-not, and named alternatives in one place.

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

All CRM Connector 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?