Skip to main content
Glama

competitor_response_email

Draft a professional reply when a client compares your price to a competitor. Choose from three response modes: hold your rate, adjust scope, or match with context.

Instructions

Write a professional reply when a client tells you another provider quoted lower — or asks you to match a competitor's price. Three response modes: hold_rate (default — acknowledge the comparison, clarify what differentiates your work, hold your price without apologising or justifying at length; best when your rate reflects genuine experience and scope), adjust_scope (offer a reduced scope or phased approach that delivers real value at a lower price — not a discount, a trade; best when there's genuine flexibility in what's needed), or match_with_context (match or approach the price but anchor it clearly to a specific reason — limited capacity window, long-term relationship, or strategic fit; do not use just to close a deal). None of these modes cave, get defensive, or lecture the client about what they're 'really getting'. All three respect that the client is comparing options. Required: client_name. Optional: competitor_name (who they're comparing to — omit to keep vague), competitor_price (the competing quote), your_price (your quoted price), project_name, response_mode ('hold_rate', 'adjust_scope', 'match_with_context' — default hold_rate), differentiator (the one concrete thing that separates your work — e.g. 'previous work on similar-scale projects', 'full ownership of the project without handoffs', 'I already know your brand well'; omit for a clean close without specifics), your_name. Does not count against your monthly draft limit.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
client_nameYesClient's first name
competitor_nameNoOptional: who they're comparing to (e.g. 'the other agency', 'Vendor X'). Omit to keep the reply general.
competitor_priceNoOptional: the competing quote (e.g. '$3,000', '$15/hr'). Including it lets the reply address the gap directly.
your_priceNoOptional: your quoted price. Including both prices lets the reply frame the gap concretely.
project_nameNoOptional: the project being discussed.
response_modeNoHow to respond: hold_rate (default — hold your price, explain value without apologising), adjust_scope (offer a smaller scope at a lower price — a trade, not a discount), match_with_context (approach or match the price with a clear, specific reason).
differentiatorNoOptional: the one concrete thing that separates your work from the competitor — e.g. 'previous work on similar-scale projects', 'single point of contact through delivery', 'I already know your brand and team'. Specific beats generic.
your_nameNoYour name for the sign-off
Behavior4/5

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

Without annotations, the description carries full burden. It details the three modes, their appropriate contexts, and behaviors to avoid. It also notes that the tool does not count against the monthly draft limit. Missing info on authentication or side effects, but these are less critical for a drafting tool.

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 but front-loads the purpose and key modes. Every sentence adds value, though it could be more structured with bullet points. It's not overly verbose.

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 the tool's complexity (three modes, 8 parameters), the description covers behavioral guidance, parameter semantics, and a note on draft limits. No output schema exists, so the description adequately implies the output (a drafted reply). It addresses likely agent confusion about which mode to use.

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 baseline is 3. The description adds value by explaining the purpose and nuance of each mode, giving examples for differentiator, and clarifying how optional parameters affect output (e.g., omitting competitor_name keeps reply vague). This goes beyond the schema descriptions.

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 explicitly states it writes a professional reply when a client compares prices. This clearly differentiates it from sibling tools like discount_request_response or bid_lost_follow_up by targeting a specific scenario.

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?

The description provides explicit guidance on when to use each of the three response modes and when not to (e.g., 'do not use just to close a deal' for match_with_context). It also clarifies what behaviors are avoided (caving, defensiveness). However, it does not explicitly mention alternative tools for related scenarios.

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