SiteCheck Company Records

Lead formatter: cleans a list of contact records you supply

b2b_lead_formatter

Read-only

Lead formatter: cleans a list of contact records you supply (name, company, email, phone, website) into one consistent shape: trims spaces, fixes casing of names, lowercases emails and domains, keeps digits of phone numbers, and flags invalid emails. It adds no outside data. Price: $0.002 in USDC per successful call, paid with x402 (Base, Solana or Arc); failed calls are not 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": {
      "records": "<records>"
    },
    "name": "b2b_lead_formatter"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`records`	Yes	Up to 50 objects with optional name, company, email, phone, website strings

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`count`	No
`source`	No
`records`	No
`checkedAt`	No
`invalidEmails`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedOct 23, 2026

TDQS

A4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Goes well beyond the annotations by disclosing the exact cleaning rules, that no external data is merged, and the pricing model ($0.002 USDC per successful call via x402, no charge on failure). The only tension is that openWorldHint=true sits oddly against 'adds no outside data,' but that is a weak flag, not a contradiction of readOnlyHint; what is missing is behavior at the 50-record boundary (error vs truncate).

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?

Front-loads what the tool is and what it does, then appends the two pieces of non-obvious operational information (no external data, pricing). No filler sentences; every clause carries either scope, behavior, or cost.

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 one-parameter read-only formatter with an output schema, this covers the essentials: cleaning semantics, absence of enrichment, cost and billing conditions. Only the overflow/error behavior for records exceeding the 50-item cap is left unspecified.

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?

There is a single parameter with 100% schema description coverage, so the schema already carries the contract. The description restates the same field list (name, company, email, phone, website) without adding format guidance, so it adds little beyond structured data and lands at the baseline.

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 and resource ('cleans a list of contact records you supply') and enumerates the transformations applied, so the agent knows exactly what comes out. The line 'It adds no outside data' sharply separates it from every sibling, which are all external lookups (b2b_skip_trace, b2b_yellowpages, etc.).

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?

Usage is implied rather than stated: 'records you supply' and 'adds no outside data' signal this is a post-processing step for data the agent already holds, not a source. But the description never explicitly says when to pick this over an enrichment sibling (e.g., 'use skip_trace instead if you need to find missing emails') and gives no exclusions.

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

All SiteCheck Company 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?