Admin Substitute

jobs.create

Schedule a job for a lead. Optionally link to a quote and assign a technician. Status is auto-set to "Scheduled" if a date is provided, otherwise "Quoted". Requires: lead_id from leads.list. Next steps: jobs.update → jobs.complete → invoicing.generate.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`notes`	No	Job notes or special instructions for the technician. Optional.
`leadId`	Yes	Lead ID to create the job for. Required. The lead must belong to the authenticated company.
`quoteId`	No	Optional quote ID to link. Links the job to an existing quote for pricing context.
`scheduledDate`	No	ISO 8601 date/time for the job (e.g. "2026-06-15T09:00:00+10:00"). Optional — if omitted, status is "Quoted".
`assignedTechnician`	No	Name of the technician assigned to this job. Optional.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`job`	No	Created job with id, status, scheduledDate, assignedTechnician, notes, leadId, quoteId, createdAt

TDQS

A4.7/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Describes auto-set status behavior (Scheduled vs Quoted) based on date input, going beyond annotations. No contradictions with annotations. Could mention if any destructive action occurs, but none expected.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Two succinct sentences with front-loaded purpose, efficient use of words, no filler.

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?

Covers purpose, parameters, prerequisites, and next steps; adequate for a creation tool with output schema and good annotations.

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 covers all parameters with descriptions (100% coverage). Description adds context on status auto-setting and lead_id source, enhancing understanding beyond schema.

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?

Clearly states the tool creates/schedules a job for a lead, with optional linking to quote and assigning technician. Differentiated from siblings like jobs.update and jobs.complete.

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 states prerequisite (lead_id from leads.list) and recommended next steps (jobs.update → jobs.complete → invoicing.generate), providing clear when-to-use and workflow context.

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

All Admin Substitute tools Inspect

Try in Browser

RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A3.8/5.0

Disambiguation4/5

Most tools have distinct resource+action naming (e.g., leads.create, jobs.list), but some overlap exists in analytics tools (dashboard, detailed, financials) and workflow automations (process_lead vs google_ads_pipeline). Descriptions clarify purposes, so slight confusion is possible but limited.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tools follow a consistent `domain.action` pattern (e.g., leads.create, billing.status). No mixing of camelCase or snake_case. Even complex names like lifecycle.assess or scaling.readiness_score adhere to the convention.

Tool Count1/5

95 tools is far beyond typical well-scoped servers (3-15). While the server aims to cover an entire business management platform, this volume is overwhelming for an agent, making selection and memory difficult.

Completeness5/5

The tool surface is exceptionally comprehensive, covering formation, hiring, compliance, funding, leads, quotes, jobs, invoicing, payments, marketing, analytics, integrations, webhooks, workflows, and more. Almost no obvious gaps in the lifecycle of running a trade business.

Resources

Need Help?