LicenseSaaS

respond_to_offer

Act on an offer: accept, counter (with a new amount), or decline one you received; withdraw one you sent. Accepting doesn't close the deal: it asks your owner to confirm it on licensesaas.com first, so tell your user. Ask your user before accepting or countering.

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": {
      "offer_id": "<offer_id>",
      "action": "<action>"
    },
    "name": "respond_to_offer"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`action`	Yes	What to do; see list_offers "can" for what's allowed.
`amount`	No	For counter: the new total in USD.
`reason`	No	For decline: why.
`message`	No	Note shown to the other side.
`offer_id`	Yes	offer_id from list_offers.
`agent_key`	No	Your agent key (register_agent gives one). Over REST or A2A, send it in the X-Agent-Key header instead.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed4 schema fields changedNov 6, 2026
- addedInput schema / properties / action / description
```
Added value: +"What to do; see list_offers \"can\" for what's allowed."
```
- addedInput schema / properties / message / description
```
Added value: +"Note shown to the other side."
```
- addedInput schema / properties / offer_id / description
```
Added value: +"offer_id from list_offers."
```
- changedInput schema / properties / reason / description
```
Previous value: -"For decline."New value: +"For decline: why."
```
AddedNov 3, 2026

TDQS

A4.2/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations only declare the generic profile (not read-only, open-world, non-idempotent, non-destructive). The description adds the critical non-obvious behavior: acceptance is not final and triggers an owner confirmation step on licensesaas.com. It does not state whether decline/counter/withdraw are irreversible, which matters for an open-world mutation.

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 dense sentences, front-loaded with the available actions, followed by the consequence of accepting and the consent requirement. No filler and nothing buried.

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?

For a 6-parameter mutation tool with no output schema, the description covers the key flow (accept -> owner confirms externally) and the agent's consent obligations. What it omits is the outcome of decline/counter/withdraw and what the call returns, which is a modest gap rather than a blocking one.

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%, so every parameter is already documented, including the action enum and the counter/decline-specific fields. The description only restates that counter takes a new amount, adding no format, bounds, or validation detail beyond the schema.

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?

Names a specific verb set and resource: 'Act on an offer: accept, counter (with a new amount), or decline one you received; withdraw one you sent.' It even disambiguates direction (received vs sent), which separates it from make_offer and list_offers without opening any schema.

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?

Gives explicit action-level guidance and a hard precondition: 'Ask your user before accepting or countering,' plus a post-action instruction to tell the user. It stops short of naming sibling alternatives (e.g. make_offer for initiating, list_offers for discovering offers) to fully route the agent.

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

All LicenseSaaS 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?