Skip to main content
Glama

Sliq

by com.getsliq
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Correct Reply Outcome

correct_reply_outcome

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
channelYes'linkedin' or 'email' — which reply table the message_id is in.
outcomeYesThe corrected outcome — 'interested', 'meeting_booked', 'not_interested' (an explicit decline), or '' for neither (a plain reply).
message_idYesThe inbound reply's row id (email_data / linkedin_data PK), from a message-search result. Must be a reply the user received.
on_behalf_ofNoAn agency client's email, from list_agency_clients, to run this call in that client's account: their agents, settings, connected accounts, and credits. Omit it to act on your own account.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed3 schema fields changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / channel / title
      Added value: +"Channel"
    • addedInput schema / properties / on_behalf_of
      Added value: +{
+  "anyOf": [
+    {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    {
+      "type": "null"
+    }
+  ],
+  "default": null,
+  "description": "An agency client's email, from list_agency_clients, to run this call in that client's account: their agents, settings, connected accounts, and credits. Omit it to act on your own account."
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / outcome / title
      Added value: +"ReplyOutcome"
  2. First observed

TDQS

A4.8/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations only declare readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false; the description adds substantial behavioral context: it moves the stage in either direction, unlike update_prospect, and not_interested is a rung between replied and the positives that still counts as replied in the funnel. These consequences go well beyond the safety hints and clarify what the correction actually does to prospect state.

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 the core action and structured with summary/returns tags. It is longer than minimal but information-dense: every clause adds routing guidance, behavioral consequence, or parameter sourcing, with no obvious 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?

For a 4-parameter mutation tool with no output schema, the description covers purpose, alternatives, parameter sourcing, and stage consequences, and supplies a returns summary. Nothing essential an agent needs in order to select or call the tool correctly is missing.

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 meaning beyond the schema by explaining the effect of outcome='not_interested' (explicit decline, stage movement, funnel treatment) and by naming the exact search tools for obtaining message_id, though channel and on_behalf_of semantics remain schema-only.

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 (re-judge) and resource (one inbound reply's outcome), plus the secondary effect of re-deriving the prospect's stage. It explicitly distinguishes itself from update_prospect by directionality and by requiring a reply behind the correction, so an agent can route between them without opening schemas.

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 explicit when-to-use conditions: lower false meeting_booked/interested, raise under-called outcomes, or record an explicit decline. It names the alternative update_prospect and the precise condition selecting it (marking a rung with no reply behind it), and points to search tools for finding the required message_id.

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

All Sliq toolsInspect
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