Zooq

email_prospects

Read-onlyIdempotent

Page emails already known for a company domain. Cursor-paginated; returns up to 20 contacts per page with first/last name. (Costs 10 Zooq credits.)

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": {
      "domain": "<domain>",
      "kind": "<kind>"
    },
    "name": "email_prospects"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`kind`	Yes	Which addresses to return. Accepted values: full (all known emails), verified_only (deliverable only).
`cursor`	No	Opaque pagination cursor. Omit for the first page; pass the previous response's next_cursor for the next.
`domain`	Yes	Company domain as a bare hostname (no scheme, no @).

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description
`kind`	No	Example value was a string
`count`	No	Example value was a number
`domain`	No	Example value was a string
`prospects`	No	Array in the example
`next_cursor`	No	Example value was a string

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedAug 24, 2026

changedOutput schema / (root)

Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "additionalProperties": true,
+  "description": "Structural schema derived from a live example — field names and nesting only, no type constraints: fields may be absent, null, or a different primitive than the example, and new fields may appear. The text content block carries the same JSON.",
+  "properties": {
+    "count": {
+      "description": "Example value was a number"
+    },
+    "domain": {
+      "description": "Example value was a string"
+    },
+    "kind": {
+      "description": "Example value was a string"
+    },
+    "next_cursor": {
+      "description": "Example value was a string"
+    },
+    "prospects": {
+      "description": "Array in the example",
+      "items": {
+        "additionalProperties": true,
+        "properties": {
+          "email": {
+            "description": "Example value was a string"
+          },
+          "first_name": {
+            "description": "Example value was a string"
+          },
+          "last_name": {
+            "description": "Example value was a string"
+          }
+        }
+      }
+    }
+  },
+  "type": "object"
+}

First observedAug 24, 2026

TDQS

A4.5/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already declare read-only, idempotent, non-destructive behavior. The description adds valuable behavioral context beyond annotations: the 10-credit cost, the 20-result page limit, cursor-based pagination, and the returned first/last name fields.

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 compact sentences contain all essential operational details with no filler. Scope, pagination behavior, output shape, and cost are all front-loaded and clearly presented.

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?

With rich annotations, a complete input schema, and an output schema present, the description covers the remaining operational essentials: credit cost, page size, and pagination. Nothing critical is missing for correct invocation.

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 100%, so the schema fully documents domain, kind, and cursor. The description does not add new parameter semantics beyond the mention of pagination, which is appropriate given the schema already handles the details.

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 ('Page') and a specific resource ('emails already known for a company domain'). The phrase 'already known' distinguishes it from discovery-oriented siblings like email_find, and the pagination detail clarifies the operation.

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?

The description clearly frames when to use the tool: when you need existing emails for a domain and want to page through them. It does not explicitly exclude alternatives, but the context is specific enough to guide selection.

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

All Zooq 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?