Generect Live API MCP Server

Official

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions(1)Admin

Validate email deliverability

validate_email

Check deliverability for email addresses you already have, so you can avoid bounced sends; each submitted address is billed.

Instructions

Check deliverability of emails you already have. BILLABLE — about $0.005 per email submitted — every address is billed, whatever the verdict (Tier 0 list price; your account may pay a different rate — call get_balance for your real prices, and read cost.amount_charged in every response for what was actually spent). This is the one operation where EVERY submitted address is billed — the verdict is the deliverable. Never validate an address that generate_email just returned as valid; it is already verified.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`emails`	Yes	Email addresses to validate. Each one is billed.
`timeout_ms`	No	Request timeout in milliseconds.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`cost`	No
`results`	No
`submitted`	No
`test_mode`	No
`test_mode_notice`	No
`vocabulary_warnings`	No
`deprecated_params_ignored`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed5 schema fields changedv0.12.2Oct 16, 2026

changedInput schema / $schema

Previous value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"New value: +"https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema"

removedInput schema / additionalProperties
```
Removed value: -false
```

changedOutput schema / $schema

Previous value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"New value: +"https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema"

addedOutput schema / properties / deprecated_params_ignored / propertyNames
```
Added value: +{
+  "type": "string"
+}
```
addedOutput schema / properties / vocabulary_warnings / items
```
Added value: +{}
```

Addedv0.9.0Sep 24, 2026

TDQS

A4.6/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false and openWorldHint=true, but the description adds crucial behavioral context: the operation is billable at ~$0.005 per email, every submitted address is billed regardless of verdict, and cost.amount_charged in responses shows actual spend. This exceeds annotation coverage and informs the agent of cost implications.

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 description is front-loaded with purpose, followed by critical billing details and a usage warning. While the billing parenthetical is dense, every part provides actionable information; the structure is logical and efficient.

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 annotations covering safety hints and an output schema present, the description needn't explain return values. It covers billing, usage exclusions, and cost-checking, leaving no significant gaps for an agent to call this tool correctly.

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%, fully documenting both parameters ('emails' and 'timeout_ms'). The description does not add any parameter-specific syntax or format details beyond the schema's own 'Each one is billed' note, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 ('Check deliverability') and resource ('emails you already have'), clearly distinguishing this tool from siblings like generate_email by warning against validating addresses already verified by that tool. An agent can identify the tool's function 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 Guidelines5/5

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

It provides explicit when-to-use ('emails you already have') and when-not-to-use ('Never validate an address that generate_email just returned as valid'), plus a pointer to get_balance for pricing. This is comprehensive guidance for selection and invocation.

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

Deploy Server