Skip to main content
Glama

LiveCRM

by ai.livecrm
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Create Deduplication Run

create_deduplication_run

Create a run that finds duplicate records in a scope and queues each group for review. It does nothing until dispatched, and it merges nothing on its own -- a merge is a separate decision per group, through approve_duplicate_group. It requires one rule template per kind (matching, master_record, survivorship); the connection is seeded a Default for each.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameYesA name for the run, shown in the Runs tab. It finds duplicates; it does not merge them.
write_backNoHas no effect on a deduplication run, which never writes when dispatched: it detects duplicate groups and queues each for review. Leave it unset.
filter_specNoWhich records this run covers, as a filter tree. Omit for the whole object. It DESCRIBES a population and is resolved when the run is DISPATCHED, so write what you mean -- the CRO at Skypoint is `account_name is Skypoint AND title contains CRO` -- and never look a record up to write one. You need no ids and no counts. Call list_filterable_fields first, for the field names and operators only.
object_typeYesWhich CRM object the run targets: contact, account or lead.
template_idsYesOne rule template id per kind: matching, master_record and survivorship. All three are required -- a run that does not fully specify its pass is refused. Call list_rule_templates with tool_type=deduplication to get them; every connection is seeded a Default of each kind.
connection_idYesThe CRM connection. Required. Call list_crm_connections to get one.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / write_back / description
      Added value: +"Has no effect on a deduplication run, which never writes when dispatched: it detects duplicate groups and queues each for review. Leave it unset."
  2. First observed

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations only say readOnlyHint=false/destructiveHint=false; the description adds genuinely valuable behavior the annotations can't convey: it does nothing until dispatched, never merges, and requires specific templates. This directly explains the deferred side-effect model and clarifies that merging is a separate per-group decision.

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?

Three well-ordered sentences: purpose first, then the non-obvious behavioral caveats, then the template requirement. Minimal waste, though the template sentence overlaps with the schema's own description of template_ids.

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 a complex tool with a nested filter tree and 6 parameters, the description covers the critical behavioral model (detection-only, dispatch-gated, per-group merge). It does not describe the return value, but the schema carries all parameter detail, so the remaining gap is minor.

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 coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents all six parameters including template_ids (one per kind) and filter_spec. The description restates the template requirement but adds little beyond what the schema says. Baseline 3 applies when the schema does the heavy lifting.

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?

States a specific verb+resource ('Create a run that finds duplicate records') and explicitly scopes what it is NOT ('merges nothing on its own'), routing the merge step to approve_duplicate_group. An agent can distinguish it from the other create_*_run siblings 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 Guidelines4/5

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

Clear context: use it to detect duplicates and queue groups for review, and it names the alternative (approve_duplicate_group) for the merge decision. It also signals the two-step workflow (create, then dispatch). It does not explicitly contrast with other run types, but the detection scope is unambiguous.

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

All LiveCRM toolsInspect
Try in Browser
One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources