Versium REACH

Contact Append Mcp Tool

contact_append

Read-onlyIdempotent

Enrich marketing contact records with mailing address, email, and phone for outreach and audience building

**Tips for Best Results:**
- Provide as many input fields as possible to improve match quality
- Use `indiv` match type when targeting a specific person
- Request one output type per call when optimizing for match quality (especially for phone outputs)
- Set `cfg_maxrecs` when more than one record is acceptable

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`zip`	No	5 digit ZIP code
`city`	No	City name
`last`	No	Person's last name
`email`	No	Email address to enrich
`first`	No	Person's first name
`phone`	No	10 digit phone number without formatting
`state`	No	Two-character state code (US)
`address`	No	Street address (line 1)
`outputs`	Yes	Types of contact data to return. Choose at least one output type
`address_2`	No	Apartment or unit number
`match_type`	No	Match at household (hhld) or individual (indiv) level	hhld
`cfg_maxrecs`	No	Maximum number of records to return
`cfg_required`	No	Comma or semi-colon separated response fields that must be populated for a record to be returned
`rcfg_max_emails`	No	Maximum number of emails per record (use with email_multiple)
`rcfg_exclude_domains`	No	Domains to exclude from alternate email results

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`results`	No	Records returned by the Operations API. Record fields pass through unchanged.
`query_id`	No
`warnings`	No
`input_query`	No
`num_matches`	No	Number of matching queries.
`num_results`	No	Number of records returned.
`match_counts`	No	Sparse match counts. An absent key means zero.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedSep 17, 2026

removedInput schema / properties / usage_consent_confirmed

Removed value: -{
-  "description": "Required for email outputs after the user explicitly agrees to usage charges",
-  "type": "boolean"
-}

Changed2 schema fields changedSep 16, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / cfg_required

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Comma or semi-colon separated response fields that must be populated for a record to be returned",
+  "type": "string"
+}

addedInput schema / properties / usage_consent_confirmed

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Required for email outputs after the user explicitly agrees to usage charges",
+  "type": "boolean"
+}

Changed1 schema field changedAug 20, 2026

changedOutput schema / (root)

Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "properties": {
+    "input_query": {
+      "type": [
+        "object",
+        "null"
+      ]
+    },
+    "match_counts": {
+      "description": "Sparse match counts. An absent key means zero.",
+      "type": [
+        "object",
+        "null"
+      ]
+    },
+    "num_matches": {
+      "description": "Number of matching queries.",
+      "type": [
+        "integer",
+        "null"
+      ]
+    },
+    "num_results": {
+      "description": "Number of records returned.",
+      "type": [
+        "integer",
+        "null"
+      ]
+    },
+    "query_id": {
+      "type": [
+        "string",
+        "null"
+      ]
+    },
+    "results": {
+      "description": "Records returned by the Operations API. Record fields pass through unchanged.",
+      "items": {
+        "type": "object"
+      },
+      "type": [
+        "array",
+        "null"
+      ]
+    },
+    "warnings": {
+      "items": {
+        "type": [
+          "string",
+          "integer",
+          "number",
+          "boolean",
+          "object",
+          "array",
+          "null"
+        ]
+      },
+      "type": [
+        "array",
+        "null"
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  "type": "object"
+}

First observedAug 19, 2026

TDQS

A3.6/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered and there is no contradiction. The description adds operational context around match quality and output cardinality, but it does not describe the actual lookup/return behavior or any additional side-effect considerations beyond what annotations already provide.

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 purpose is stated in one front-loaded sentence, followed by four scannable bullet-point tips. There is no fluff, repetition, or redundant restating of the schema. Every sentence contributes actionable information, and the format is easy for an agent to parse.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

The schema is 100% covered and an output schema exists, so many invocation details are already structured. The description adds useful operational tips, but given 20 siblings including several other append tools, it should explicitly state when contact_append is the right choice versus b2b2c, c2b, demographic, or firmographic append. It also omits the US-only scope that is visible in the schema.

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?

All 15 parameters have rich schema descriptions, so the baseline is 3. The description adds meaningful usage semantics by explaining when to use indiv, how output type selection affects match quality, and when to raise cfg_maxrecs. This goes beyond the schema's structural descriptions without needing to compensate for any gaps.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description starts with a specific verb ('Enrich') and a clear resource ('marketing contact records'), and names the output types (mailing address, email, phone). It is unmistakable what the tool does, but it does not explicitly contrast contact_append with the many sibling append tools, so it misses the top score.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The 'Tips for Best Results' provide practical guidance on parameter usage: use indiv for a specific person, request one output type per call for phone match quality, and set cfg_maxrecs for multiple acceptable records. However, there is no guidance on when to choose this tool over sibling append tools like b2b2c_append or c2b_append, nor any when-not-to-use conditions.

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

All Versium REACH 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?