Agent Data API

Verify email addresses

email_verify

Read-onlyIdempotent

Check email addresses without sending mail: syntax, domain and MX records, disposable domains, role accounts, catch-all hints, and a valid / risky / invalid verdict each, plus a summary. Up to 20 addresses cost $0.01 per call; 21-200 addresses are a bulk call at $0.10. For company data use company_enrich. DNS lookups live; under 1 s for 20. Paid with x402 (USDC on Base, Polygon or Solana) per call; failed or empty calls are never charged.

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": {
      "emails": "<emails>"
    },
    "name": "email_verify"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`emails`	Yes	Addresses: a list, or one comma-separated string (max 200).

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed3 schema fields changedOct 24, 2026

removedInput schema / properties / email

Removed value: -{
-  "description": "1-20 emails, comma separated",
-  "type": "string"
-}

addedInput schema / properties / emails

Added value: +{
+  "anyOf": [
+    {
+      "items": {
+        "type": "string"
+      },
+      "maxItems": 200,
+      "type": "array"
+    },
+    {
+      "type": "string"
+    }
+  ],
+  "description": "Addresses: a list, or one comma-separated string (max 200)."
+}

changedInput schema / required

Previous value: -[
-  "email"
-]New value: +[
+  "emails"
+]

First observedOct 23, 2026

TDQS

A4.6/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Adds substantial context beyond the annotations: live DNS lookups, sub-1s latency for 20 addresses, explicit pricing tiers tied to batch size, x402/USDC payment rails, and the important guarantee that failed or empty calls are never charged. With readOnly/idempotent/openWorld already declared, this is rich supplementary disclosure.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Front-loads the capability, then pricing, then routing, then payment. Dense but every clause carries operational detail (latency, cost, billing). Slightly cluttered by compressing pricing and payment into the same sentence.

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?

No output schema exists, and the description compensates by describing the return shape: per-address valid/risky/invalid verdicts plus a summary. Combined with pricing, latency, and payment behavior, an agent has everything needed to call it correctly.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description still adds meaning by tying the 20 vs 21-200 address split to pricing tiers, which tells the agent that batch size has cost consequences and that batching is preferred over repeated calls.

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?

States a specific verb (check/verify) and resource (email addresses), and enumerates exactly what is checked: syntax, domain, MX, disposable, role, catch-all. It explicitly separates itself from company_enrich, so an agent can route without opening the schema.

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?

Gives a clear condition and a named alternative: 'For company data use company_enrich.' It also implies the core use case ('without sending mail'). There is no explicit when-not-to-use beyond the company_enrich redirect, so it falls just short of a 5.

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

All Agent Data API 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?