Reach MCP

send_message

Send a LinkedIn DM via Voyager createMessage: use conversation_linkedin_id for an existing thread or recipient_linkedin_id for a new DM. Use for the classic inbox: conversation_linkedin_id to reply in a thread, recipient_linkedin_id for a new one (1st-degree connections, or InMail). Counts against the daily messages quota; for a Sales Navigator thread use salesnav_send_message; for more than ten messages use create_job.

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": {
      "account_id": "<account_id>"
    },
    "name": "send_message"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`text`	No	Plain text to send or post.
`page_id`	No	Reply as this company page (page_id from list_managed_pages; needs send_messages). A page can only answer: conversation_linkedin_id from list_conversations with the same page_id is required.
`account_id`	Yes	Reach id of the LinkedIn account to act on, from list_accounts.
`idempotency_key`	No	Optional. A key you choose (a UUID is fine) that names this exact call. If you retry with the same key and the same arguments, the first call's result is returned and nothing is done twice on LinkedIn. Reusing a key with different arguments is refused. Keys expire after 24 hours.
`in_mail_premium`	No	Send as InMail to someone outside the network (premium accounts); requires recipient_linkedin_id.
`recipient_linkedin_id`	No	Recipient profile id (fsd_profile id) to start a new conversation; from list_conversations or scrape_profile. Omit when replying in an existing conversation.
`conversation_linkedin_id`	No	Conversation (thread) id, as returned by list_conversations.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`success`	No
`status_code`	No	HTTP status from LinkedIn (e.g. 201 on success).

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedNov 3, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / page_id

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Reply as this company page (page_id from list_managed_pages; needs send_messages). A page can only answer: conversation_linkedin_id from list_conversations with the same page_id is required.",
+  "type": "string"
+}

First observedSep 10, 2026

TDQS

A4.4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already cover safety (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, openWorldHint=true), so the description's added value is the quota consumption ('counts against the daily messages quota') and the InMail/premium constraint. It adds real behavioral context but is silent on the idempotency-key behavior, which the schema documents instead.

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?

Three tight sentences, front-loaded with the core action and then the routing alternatives; every clause carries information an agent needs. No filler or restatement of the tool name.

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?

With an output schema and full parameter descriptions in the schema, the description covers the essentials: addressing modes, quota cost, and sibling routing. The one notable behavior left to the schema is replying as a company page (page_id restriction), which is not surfaced in the description text.

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 parameter meaning is already carried by structured fields; the description only restates the reply-vs-new-thread split between conversation_linkedin_id and recipient_linkedin_id. It adds routing intuition but nothing about page_id, in_mail_premium, or idempotency_key beyond what the schema says, so the baseline 3 is right.

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 names a specific verb and resource ('Send a LinkedIn DM via Voyager createMessage') and immediately explains the two addressing modes. It also explicitly distinguishes itself from salesnav_send_message and create_job, so an agent can select it without opening sibling 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?

It gives concrete routing rules: conversation_linkedin_id to reply, recipient_linkedin_id to start a new thread, salesnav_send_message for Sales Navigator threads, and create_job for more than ten messages. Both when-to-use and the named alternatives are explicit.

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

All Reach MCP 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?