Sliq

Set Outreach Approval

set_outreach_approval

settings is a partial {subtype: requires_approval} map — True holds the message for the user's approval, False auto-sends. Only the subtypes you name change. Each subtype key names a message type (e.g. email_first_message); an unknown key is rejected with the full valid list.

scope:

'this_agent' (default) — change approval for THIS agent only, leaving the account-wide setting and other agents untouched. Needs an agent in context (or an explicit agent_id). This pins the agent to its own approval settings that no longer follow account-wide changes — tell the user that.
'account' — change the account-wide default that governs every agent with no override of its own. An agent that has its own override is unaffected — warn the user that an account change won't reach any agent that has its own override. Available to the account owner only; when acting for a shared operator, use 'this_agent'.
'inherit_account' — clear THIS agent's own approval settings so it follows the account-wide setting again. settings is ignored.

Returns {success, scope, settings} — settings is the resulting resolved map for the level written. Dict with success, scope, and resulting settings.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`scope`	No	Which level to change. Defaults to 'this_agent'.	this_agent
`agent_id`	No	The agent to change. Defaults to the agent in context.
`settings`	No	Partial map of subtype -> requires_approval. Omit for scope='inherit_account'.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed2 schema fields changedSep 23, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / agent_id

Added value: +{
+  "anyOf": [
+    {
+      "type": "integer"
+    },
+    {
+      "type": "null"
+    }
+  ],
+  "default": null,
+  "description": "The agent to change. Defaults to the agent in context."
+}

removedInput schema / properties / task_id

Removed value: -{
-  "anyOf": [
-    {
-      "type": "integer"
-    },
-    {
-      "type": "null"
-    }
-  ],
-  "default": null,
-  "description": "The agent/task to change. Defaults to the task in context."
-}

First observedSep 15, 2026

TDQS

A5/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already flag this as a write operation, and the description adds substantial behavioral detail: pinning an agent to its own settings, account changes not propagating to agents with overrides, unknown subtype keys being rejected with the valid list, and inherit_account clearing overrides while ignoring settings. No contradiction with annotations.

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 long but structured into summary, returns, and labeled scope bullets, with the core purpose front-loaded. Each sentence carries operational information; even the warnings are necessary for correct agent behavior.

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 3-parameter tool with no output schema, the description is unusually complete: it covers when to call, all scope semantics, side effects, error behavior for unknown keys, and the return shape. An agent has everything needed to select and invoke it correctly.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters5/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Although schema coverage is 100%, the description goes far beyond the schema: it defines the partial-map behavior of settings, explains that only named subtypes change, and details the meaning of each scope value including defaults and the interaction with agent_id. This is exactly the semantic context an agent needs.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Change what outbound outreach holds for the user's approval before it sends.' It further clarifies the mutating nature with 'actually make the change, don't just describe the UI,' which clearly separates this setter from read-only siblings like get_outreach_approval.

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?

It gives an explicit trigger: 'Call this when the user asks to review or auto-send a message type' plus a when-not: 'don't just describe the UI.' Scope conditions are spelled out, including 'when acting for a shared operator, use 'this_agent'' and warnings about account-wide changes not reaching agents with overrides.

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

All Sliq 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?