Ontrack Moving Quotes

Request an Ontrack moving quote

request_moving_quote

Idempotent

Submit a moving quote request to Ontrack. Ask conversationally for name, contact, origin, destination, date and size; unknown destination/date/size may be empty. Show a summary and obtain explicit customer permission to share with Ontrack before calling. Never invent missing details, quote a price or promise a booking. Only a saved receipt means the request was received. Requests that pass screening go directly to sales; exceptions are saved for staff follow-up. Use the returned status to distinguish saved from received_by_sales. Requires an enabled Ontrack tool connection in the customer’s assistant.

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`name`	Yes
`email`	No	Customer email, or empty if phone provided.
`notes`	No	Move needs only. Do not send payment details, passwords, identity documents or unrelated conversation.
`phone`	No	Customer phone including area/country code, or empty if email provided.
`origin`	Yes	Origin city and state or full address, as provided by the customer.
`assistant`	No	Self-reported assistant name; not verified attribution.
`move_date`	No	YYYY-MM-DD, or empty if unknown.
`move_size`	No	Home/office size or inventory summary, or empty if unknown.
`destination`	No	Destination city/state or address; leave empty if unknown.
`idempotency_key`	Yes	Generate a random UUID or 128-bit random key for this move. Reuse the exact key and details on retries. Use a new key for a different move.
`customer_confirmed`	Yes	Set true only after showing the customer these details and obtaining explicit permission to share them with Ontrack for a moving quote and contact by phone/email. This does not enroll them in SMS.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedNov 9, 2026

TDQS

A4.5/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Beyond annotations, the description discloses screening and sales routing behavior, receipt semantics, consent requirements, and the constraint not to quote prices or promise bookings. These details materially help the agent understand what the external write does and what guarantees it provides.

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 front-loaded with the purpose and then proceeds through workflow, constraints, receipt semantics, routing, and prerequisites. Every sentence carries operational value, with no 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 complex external submission tool with consent and idempotency requirements, the description covers the critical context: prerequisites, permission handling, missing fields, receipt meaning, and status interpretation. It is complete enough to call correctly despite there being no output schema.

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 already 91%, and the schema documents idempotency, consent, contact fields, and empty-value handling. The description reinforces that unknown destination/date/size may be empty and that details must not be invented, but it adds little parameter semantics beyond the schema itself.

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 states a specific verb and resource: submitting a moving quote request to Ontrack. It clearly distinguishes this submission action from the sibling status-retrieval tool by focusing on creating the request and interpreting the resulting status.

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?

It provides explicit workflow guidance: ask conversationally, show a summary, obtain permission before calling, and only call when an Ontrack connection is enabled. However, it does not explicitly name when to use get_quote_request_status or give exclusions beyond the permission and connection prerequisites.

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

All Ontrack Moving Quotes 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?