West Kite: US commercial property owners & records

Draft outreach to an owner

draft_outreach

Idempotent

Prepare an evidence-cited draft (email, call script, text, LinkedIn or letter) for a lead or a property's owner, or revise a draft with draftId and instructions. Writing it sends nothing: the member reviews and sends it in West Kite. Returns a review link; nothing changes until the user approves.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "draft_outreach"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`leadId`	No	Pipeline lead ID from list_pipeline.
`channel`	No	Required for a new draft.
`draftId`	No	Draft to revise, from get_pipeline_lead include=drafts.
`propertyId`	No	West Kite property ID (from search or search_properties).
`contactName`	No
`instructions`	No	What the message should do, in the member's words. Required to revise.
`operationKey`	No	Optional stable key; retries with the same key return the same prepared action.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedNov 6, 2026

TDQS

A4.6/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the annotations (which only signal non-read-only, idempotent, non-destructive), the description discloses the crucial behavioral fact that nothing is sent or changed: the draft goes to a review queue the member approves in West Kite, and a review link comes back. That resolves the apparent tension between a write-shaped tool and destructiveHint=false, which is exactly the context an agent needs.

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 tight sentences: the first front-loads what is produced and the two modes, the second front-loads the safety guarantee ('writing it sends nothing'). Every clause carries information, with no repetition of schema or annotation fields.

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 7-parameter tool with no output schema, the description covers the modes, the non-sending behavior, and the return value (a review link). It leaves minor gaps, such as whether leadId and propertyId are mutually exclusive or what happens if neither is supplied, but nothing critical for correct invocation is missing.

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?

Schema coverage is already 86%, so the baseline is 3, but the description adds genuine meaning the schema does not: channel is needed only for a new draft and instructions only for a revision, and leadId vs propertyId represent alternative targeting modes. This compensates for the empty required array by explaining which parameters pair with which operation.

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 output artifact ('Prepare an evidence-cited draft'), enumerates the supported channels (email, call script, text, LinkedIn, letter), and covers both creation and revision modes. This cleanly separates it from adjacent tools like revise_document or create_document, which operate on documents rather than outreach drafts to a lead or owner.

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 gives concrete entry conditions for each mode: a new draft needs a lead or property target plus a channel, while revising needs draftId and instructions. It stops short of explicitly saying when to prefer revise_document over drafting a revision, so the routing against that one sibling is left implicit.

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

All West Kite: US commercial property owners & records 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?