Now, after sticking to my guns with correct language use based of semantics, I need to make a caveat. I found an example of a certainly native-English-speaking corporation that uses the phrase "an offer can be applied" (though only once). It happens to be Amazon in its how-to for promotional codes. Note that when the process is described, the how-to shows where to enter a promotional code (not offer) and then click "apply." You can't enter an offer into a field. The phrase in question (the questionable phrase) appears further down amidst a whole lot of legalese. The thing is, the document specifically defines, for the purposes of the document, what the word "offer" will mean for the purposes of this particular document, and it's one heck of a intricate ball of attributes: "promotional claim code offer."
And where the "offer is applied", it is an example of catachresis, that is, a semantic error. It can be used by native speakers, sometimes as high literature—there it would be a deliberate "skewing" of the language landscape for poetic purposes, like the example in the Wikipedia article, "Mow the beard, Shave the grass."
This is not a reason, however, to expect a phrase like "My wife wants me to mow my beard" to be okayed for everyday use.
Which is why answers both on wordreference and here were suggesting to substitute something else either for "offer" ("promo code"), or for "applied" ("be used").
The correct semantics of this, I have detailed in the discussion to my previous answer.
An important factor in what to use in a language is established usage. Established usage is that it's the promo codes and the discounts that are "applied", overwhelmingly. The possibility of buying something with such a discount is an offer by a company, which is a meta-term, and it would be a semantic/stylistical mistake to use it metonymically.
The correct usage would be "This 20% sale is a nice offer by this company. You can take advantage of it by using a promo code. You apply it in your shopping cart when checking out".
Awkward language happens to all native speakers, especially when an intersection of legal matters and software use is involved.
Best Answer
Not quite.
You are trying to use a passive voice. In the passive voice, the subject of the sentence is the thing being acted on instead of the thing acting. So if you said simply, "He will be contacted three times," that would be a good and valid sentence. "He" is the thing being contacted.
If you were using the active voice, you might say, "We will try to contact him three times." That would also be good and valid: "We" is the subject, and the thing we are doing is "trying", and specifically what we are trying is "to contact".
But you can't switch this complex verb, "try to contact", to the passive, "He will be tried to be contacted." The problem is that "he" is not "being tried". That is, we are not trying "him", we are trying "to contact". So you can't say, "He is being tried". You want to say that the contacts are being tried, not him. To the best of my knowledge, there is no way in English to turn "verb-1 to verb-2" into a passive voice. You could convey the idea by saying, "Three contacts with him will be tried." I think that's an awkward sentence, but it's grammatically valid. I'd prefer to say, "Three tries will be made to contact him" or "Three attempts to contact him will be made". Or switch it to the active voice: "We will try to contact him three times."
Note that the structure you are using would be valid if "he" was properly the thing acted on by both verbs. For example, you could say, "He will be asked to be added to the list." This is valid because "he" is the thing being asked, and "he" is also the thing being added.
Side note: Perhaps I should make clear that "tried" IN THE SENSE THAT YOU ARE USING IT IN THIS SENTENCE is not acting on "he". The English word "try" can mean "attempt", which is how you are using it here. A person cannot be attempted. What would that mean? But "try" can also mean "put on trial", as in a courtroom with a judge and jury. In that sense, you certainly can try a person, and a person can be tried.