Skip to main content
Glama

discovery_call_follow_up_email

Writes a professional follow-up email after a discovery call, summarizing key discussion points and confirming next steps to move the proposal forward.

Instructions

Write the short follow-up email sent within 24 hours of a discovery call with a new prospect. Fills the critical workflow gap: meeting_request_email → [call happens] → discovery_call_follow_up_email → draft_proposal. Distinct from project_kickoff_email (sent after signing, not after an intro call) and meeting_request_email (schedules the call — this follows it). Structure: warm one-line open, brief summary of the 2–3 key things discussed (confirms you were listening and reduces 'what did we actually agree?' friction), confirmed next step with a date if available, and a low-pressure 'let me know if I've missed anything' close. Under 150 words. The email most freelancers skip — which is why sending it immediately differentiates you. Does not count against your monthly draft limit.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
client_nameYesClient's first name or full name
project_nameNoName or type of project discussed (e.g. 'the rebrand', 'your new website')
what_discussedYes2–3 key points covered in the call, comma-separated (e.g. 'timeline of 6 weeks, design-only scope, launching before Q4'). Auto-formatted as a short summary.
confirmed_next_stepNoThe agreed next action (e.g. 'I'll have a proposal to you by Thursday', 'you'll send over the existing brand assets', 'we'll reconnect after your board meeting'). If omitted, the email closes with a general next-step offer.
your_nameNoYour name for the sign-off
Behavior5/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description fully discloses behavioral traits: it produces an under-150-word email, does not count against monthly draft limits, and follows a specific structure. No contradictions with missing annotations.

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 informative but slightly lengthy; it could be tightened without losing clarity. However, it is well-structured and front-loads the core purpose.

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?

Given no output schema and moderate complexity, the description fully explains the tool's output (email), its workflow position, and behavioral constraints, making it complete for an agent to use.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters5/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

All 5 parameters are described in the schema (100% coverage), and the description adds significant meaning beyond the schema, such as auto-formatting for what_discussed and fallback behavior for confirmed_next_step.

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 clearly states the tool writes a follow-up email after a discovery call, providing a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from siblings by explicitly differentiating from meeting_request_email and project_kickoff_email.

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?

The description provides explicit when-to-use guidance (within 24 hours of a discovery call) and identifies alternative tools for different contexts, including the workflow sequence: meeting_request_email → call → this email → draft_proposal.

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