Admin Substitute

quotes.list

Read-only

List quotes with line items, totals, status, and linked lead info. Supports filtering by status and cursor-based pagination. Tip: Create quotes with quotes.create (requires a lead_id from leads.create or leads.list first).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`limit`	No	Maximum number of quotes to return. Defaults to 50, capped at 100.
`cursor`	No	Pagination cursor from previous response. Pass to get next page of results.
`status`	No	Filter by quote status. Omit to return all statuses.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`count`	No	Total quotes returned
`quotes`	No	List of quote records with nested lineItems and lead info

TDQS

A4.5/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already indicate read-only behavior. The description adds that the tool supports status filtering and cursor-based pagination, and returns specific data fields, providing valuable behavioral context beyond the 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?

The description is two short sentences plus a tip, all front-loaded with essential information. No extraneous content.

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?

The description covers the key aspects: what data is returned, filtering, pagination, and a helpful tip. An output schema exists, so return value details are not needed. Completeness is high.

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 parameters are already well-documented. The description mentions filtering by status and pagination, which adds minimal extra meaning over the schema. Score is baseline at 3.

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 lists quotes with specific details (line items, totals, status, linked lead info), and mentions filtering and pagination. This differentiates it from sibling tools like quotes.create and quotes.update.

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?

The tip provides context on creating quotes and the prerequisite for leads, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus other list tools. However, the description is clear enough for standard usage.

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?