Admin Substitute

leads.create

Create a new lead/prospect. Auto-assigns to the authenticated company. Source defaults to "mcp" if not specified.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`name`	Yes	Full name of the prospect. Required.
`email`	No	Email address for quote delivery and follow-ups. Optional.
`phone`	Yes	Australian phone number (e.g. 0412 345 678). Required.
`source`	No	Where this lead came from (e.g. "referral", "website", "hipages", "mcp"). Defaults to "mcp".
`address`	No	Job site or client address. Optional.
`message`	No	Initial enquiry message or job description from the client. Optional.
`priority`	No	Lead priority. Defaults to Medium if omitted.
`serviceType`	No	Type of service needed (e.g. "Hot Water Replacement", "Roof Repair"). Optional.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`lead`	No	Created lead with id, name, phone, email, serviceType, status, priority, source, createdAt

TDQS

A3.8/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations provide readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false. Description adds auto-assignment to authenticated company and source defaulting to 'mcp', which are useful behavioral traits beyond annotations.

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 sentences, no fluff. Front-loaded with main purpose, efficient.

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?

With 8 parameters (2 required) and an output schema, the description covers key behaviors but doesn't mention return value format or error cases. Still adequate for a creation tool.

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 description coverage is 100%; the description only mentions source defaults, which is already in schema. No new parameter meaning added beyond what schema provides.

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 'Create a new lead/prospect' with specific verb and resource. Adds auto-assignment and default source, distinguishing from siblings like leads.update and leads.list.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., leads.update or other creation tools). Does not state prerequisites or exclusions.

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?