Rafid Intelligence Network

preview_capability

Read-onlyIdempotent

Free preview of a paid capability: checks whether useful data/analysis is available for a given input, before paying â€” proof of "I have information for this request," never the paid analysis itself. No payment, charge or account is ever involved. Not every capability supports preview (status is "unavailable" when it doesn't). Recommended flow: discover -> preview -> evaluate -> pay -> execute.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`input`	No	The same input the paid capability accepts. Optional for a capability whose preview needs no input fields.
`capability`	Yes	A capability name from this tool list, e.g. "research_company".

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`status`	Yes
`preview`	Yes
`capability`	Yes
`fullResult`	Yes
`leakageClass`	No
`inputRecognized`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedSep 29, 2026

addedOutput schema / properties / leakageClass

Added value: +{
+  "enum": [
+    "SAFE",
+    "LOW",
+    "MEDIUM",
+    "HIGH"
+  ],
+  "type": "string"
+}

Changed4 schema fields changedSep 23, 2026
- addedOutput schema / properties / fullResult / properties / paymentMethods / items / additionalProperties
```
Added value: +false
```
- addedOutput schema / properties / fullResult / properties / paymentMethods / items / properties
```
Added value: +{
+  "enabled": {
+    "const": true,
+    "type": "boolean"
+  },
+  "endpoint": {
+    "type": "string"
+  },
+  "id": {
+    "type": "string"
+  }
+}
```
- addedOutput schema / properties / fullResult / properties / paymentMethods / items / required
```
Added value: +[
+  "id",
+  "enabled",
+  "endpoint"
+]
```
- changedOutput schema / properties / fullResult / properties / paymentMethods / items / type
```
Previous value: -"string"New value: +"object"
```
AddedSep 23, 2026

TDQS

A4.6/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations cover the safety profile (readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive), and the description adds genuinely new behavioral context: no payment/charge/account is ever involved, the output is a proof-of-information rather than the paid analysis, and unsupported capabilities return 'unavailable'. This is exactly the extra context the low-bar-with-annotations case rewards.

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?

The core distinction is front-loaded in the first clause and the flow summary is useful, but the em-dash aside and inline quotation marks add mild density. Sized appropriately overall with little waste.

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?

For a gateway/preview tool with an output schema covering return values, the description supplies everything an agent needs: cost model, mutual exclusivity with the paid tool, eligibility caveat, and placement in the call sequence.

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 both 'capability' and 'input' are already documented, and the description's 'for a given input' adds no syntax or format detail beyond it. Baseline 3 is appropriate when the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 (preview/check) and resource (a paid capability) and explicitly distinguishes itself from the paid siblings: it returns proof that data exists, 'never the paid analysis itself'. An agent can tell it apart from research_company and similar tools without opening a schema.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

Gives explicit when-to-use ('before paying') and when-it-fails ('status is "unavailable" when it doesn't [support preview]'), plus a recommended sequence: discover -> preview -> evaluate -> pay -> execute. Alternatives and exclusions are both named.

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

All Rafid Intelligence Network 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.