Skip to main content
Glama

client_reference_request_email

Generate an email asking a past client to serve as a reference for a prospect, providing context and setting time expectations for a simple yes or no.

Instructions

Ask a trusted past client to be a named reference for a specific prospect — someone the prospect can email or call directly. Different from testimonial_request (written quote for your website), recommendation_request_email (LinkedIn), and referral_request (active warm intro). A reference is a person on your reference list who speaks directly to a prospect doing due diligence. This email makes the ask easy: it gives context on the prospect, sets expectations on time commitment, and makes it simple to say yes or no. Does not count against your monthly draft limit.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
client_nameYesThe client's first name
project_nameYesThe project or engagement you worked on together — gives them context for what they'd be speaking to (e.g. 'the brand identity project', 'the six-month retainer', 'the website redesign')
prospect_typeYesA short description of the prospect — what kind of business or person they are and what they're looking to hire for. No need to name them. (e.g. 'a B2B SaaS startup looking for a content strategist', 'a boutique law firm that needs a website redesign', 'a founder evaluating fractional CFO services')
prospect_nameNoOptional: the prospect's name, if you're comfortable sharing it and want to personalise the ask
time_commitmentNoOptional: expected time commitment if they're contacted — sets expectations and removes anxiety (e.g. 'a 10-minute call', 'a few email questions', 'a quick 15-minute chat'). Defaults to 'a short call or a few email questions' if omitted.
your_nameNoOptional: your name for the sign-off
Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must convey behavior. It explains that the email 'makes the ask easy: it gives context on the prospect, sets expectations on time commitment, and makes it simple to say yes or no'. It also notes the draft limit exemption. However, it does not disclose any authentication requirements, whether the email is sent automatically, or other side effects.

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 a single paragraph that efficiently front-loads the core purpose, then adds differentiation, context, and a key behavioral note (draft limit). It is concise without unnecessary words.

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?

Given no output schema, the description explains what the email does and its context. It sets expectations for what the tool produces (an email that includes context, time commitment, and an easy yes/no). It is sufficient for an agent to understand the tool's output.

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 baseline is 3. The description does not add parameter-specific meaning beyond the schema, but the schema descriptions themselves are detailed. The overall description provides context but not parameter-level detail.

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?

Description clearly states the tool's verb and resource: 'Ask a trusted past client to be a named reference for a specific prospect'. It immediately distinguishes from three sibling tools (testimonial_request, recommendation_request_email, referral_request) by contrasting their purposes.

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?

Explicitly compares to alternative tools and provides context on when to use each. Also notes that the tool 'does not count against your monthly draft limit', providing a practical rule for usage.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/jabbawocky/proposalcraft'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server