Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

CRM Connector

by com.crm-connector
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Propose: Change another item

propose_update_item

AI Agents (inside one system): Use when the person asks for this in a system whose AI agent may change records: New values for an item next to the six record types, such as a product price, a coupon, a custom record or a pipeline's stages; only what is given changes. Give one item per record, at most 25. Nothing is written yet: the answer shows, per record, what it holds now and would hold after, plus a proposal id. Show it to the person, say so first when something would be sent to the people in their system, ask whether to go ahead, and only then call apply_proposal; when needsApproval is true, share the approve link instead. Not for reading (use search_records or get_record).

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "system": "<system>",
      "items": "<items>"
    },
    "name": "propose_update_item"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
itemsYesOne object per record, at most 25.
systemYesWhich AI agent: the system's id from get_ai_agent_options, or the name of the system or its connection. Ask the person which AI agent they mean unless they named it in this conversation; never pick one yourself.

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
noticeNo
changesYes
systemIdYes
warningsYes
expiresAtYes
approveUrlYes
proposalIdYes
systemNameYes
needsApprovalYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / items / items / properties / item_kind / enum
      Previous value: -[
-  "business",
-  "contact_person",
-  "custom_record",
-  "object",
-  "link_type",
-  "link",
-  "product",
-  "price",
-  "product_collection",
-  "coupon",
-  "order",
-  "transaction",
-  "subscription",
-  "invoice_schedule",
-  "invoice_template",
-  "calendar",
-  "calendar_group",
-  "calendar_resource",
-  "blocked_slot",
-  "service",
-  "booking",
-  "pipeline",
-  "custom_field",
-  "custom_value",
-  "location_tag",
-  "template",
-  "location",
-  "user",
-  "project",
-  "project_task",
-  "recurring_task",
-  "comment",
-  "document",
-  "document_template",
-  "workflow",
-  "workflow_log",
-  "form",
-  "form_submission",
-  "survey",
-  "survey_submission",
-  "campaign",
-  "conversation",
-  "price_list",
-  "credit_note",
-  "retainer_invoice",
-  "sales_receipt",
-  "debit_note",
-  "delivery_challan",
-  "time_entry",
-  "expense",
-  "recurring_expense",
-  "bill",
-  "recurring_bill",
-  "purchase_order",
-  "purchase_return",
-  "vendor",
-  "vendor_payment",
-  "vendor_credit",
-  "journal",
-  "account",
-  "tax",
-  "currency",
-  "bank_account"
-]New value: +[
+  "business",
+  "contact_person",
+  "lead",
+  "custom_record",
+  "object",
+  "link_type",
+  "link",
+  "product",
+  "price",
+  "product_collection",
+  "coupon",
+  "order",
+  "transaction",
+  "subscription",
+  "invoice_schedule",
+  "invoice_template",
+  "calendar",
+  "calendar_group",
+  "calendar_resource",
+  "blocked_slot",
+  "service",
+  "booking",
+  "pipeline",
+  "custom_field",
+  "custom_value",
+  "location_tag",
+  "template",
+  "location",
+  "user",
+  "report",
+  "project",
+  "project_task",
+  "recurring_task",
+  "comment",
+  "document",
+  "document_template",
+  "workflow",
+  "workflow_log",
+  "form",
+  "form_submission",
+  "survey",
+  "survey_submission",
+  "campaign",
+  "conversation",
+  "group",
+  "macro",
+  "view",
+  "article",
+  "satisfaction_rating",
+  "price_list",
+  "credit_note",
+  "retainer_invoice",
+  "sales_receipt",
+  "debit_note",
+  "delivery_challan",
+  "time_entry",
+  "expense",
+  "recurring_expense",
+  "bill",
+  "recurring_bill",
+  "purchase_order",
+  "purchase_return",
+  "vendor",
+  "vendor_payment",
+  "vendor_credit",
+  "journal",
+  "account",
+  "tax",
+  "currency",
+  "bank_account"
+]
  2. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / items / items / properties / item_kind / enum
      Previous value: -[
-  "business",
-  "custom_record",
-  "object",
-  "link_type",
-  "link",
-  "product",
-  "price",
-  "product_collection",
-  "coupon",
-  "order",
-  "transaction",
-  "subscription",
-  "invoice_schedule",
-  "invoice_template",
-  "calendar",
-  "calendar_group",
-  "calendar_resource",
-  "blocked_slot",
-  "service",
-  "booking",
-  "pipeline",
-  "custom_field",
-  "custom_value",
-  "location_tag",
-  "template",
-  "location",
-  "user",
-  "project",
-  "project_task",
-  "recurring_task",
-  "comment",
-  "document",
-  "document_template",
-  "workflow",
-  "workflow_log",
-  "form",
-  "form_submission",
-  "survey",
-  "survey_submission",
-  "campaign",
-  "conversation",
-  "price_list",
-  "credit_note",
-  "retainer_invoice",
-  "sales_receipt",
-  "debit_note",
-  "delivery_challan",
-  "time_entry",
-  "expense",
-  "recurring_expense",
-  "bill",
-  "recurring_bill",
-  "purchase_order",
-  "purchase_return",
-  "vendor",
-  "vendor_payment",
-  "vendor_credit",
-  "journal",
-  "account",
-  "tax",
-  "currency",
-  "bank_account"
-]New value: +[
+  "business",
+  "contact_person",
+  "custom_record",
+  "object",
+  "link_type",
+  "link",
+  "product",
+  "price",
+  "product_collection",
+  "coupon",
+  "order",
+  "transaction",
+  "subscription",
+  "invoice_schedule",
+  "invoice_template",
+  "calendar",
+  "calendar_group",
+  "calendar_resource",
+  "blocked_slot",
+  "service",
+  "booking",
+  "pipeline",
+  "custom_field",
+  "custom_value",
+  "location_tag",
+  "template",
+  "location",
+  "user",
+  "project",
+  "project_task",
+  "recurring_task",
+  "comment",
+  "document",
+  "document_template",
+  "workflow",
+  "workflow_log",
+  "form",
+  "form_submission",
+  "survey",
+  "survey_submission",
+  "campaign",
+  "conversation",
+  "price_list",
+  "credit_note",
+  "retainer_invoice",
+  "sales_receipt",
+  "debit_note",
+  "delivery_challan",
+  "time_entry",
+  "expense",
+  "recurring_expense",
+  "bill",
+  "recurring_bill",
+  "purchase_order",
+  "purchase_return",
+  "vendor",
+  "vendor_payment",
+  "vendor_credit",
+  "journal",
+  "account",
+  "tax",
+  "currency",
+  "bank_account"
+]
    • changedInput schema / properties / items / items / properties / parent / description
      Previous value: -"The item it sits in, where the kind needs one: the object of a custom record, the product of a price, the project of a task, the task of a comment."New value: +"The item it sits in, where the kind needs one: the object of a custom record, the product of a price, the contact of a contact person, the project of a task or time entry, the task or project of a comment."
  3. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / system / description
      Previous value: -"Which AI agent: the system's id from get_ai_agents_info, or the name of the system or its connection. Ask the person which AI agent they mean unless they named it in this conversation; never pick one yourself."New value: +"Which AI agent: the system's id from get_ai_agent_options, or the name of the system or its connection. Ask the person which AI agent they mean unless they named it in this conversation; never pick one yourself."
  4. Added

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the annotations (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, openWorldHint=true), the description discloses the dry-run nature ('Nothing is written yet'), what the response contains (per-record current vs. proposed values plus a proposal id), the 25-item cap, and the needsApproval branching to an approval link. It also warns about user-visible side effects ('say so first when something would be sent to the people in their system'), which the annotations cannot express.

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?

Content is front-loaded with the trigger condition and the dry-run guarantee before the workflow details, and almost every clause carries actionable information. It loses a mark for dense, occasionally muddled phrasing such as 'New values for an item next to the six record types', which costs a reading pass, and for a very long single block with no structural breaks.

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?

For a two-parameter, high-blast-radius proposal tool, the description covers the trigger, the limit, the read-only preview, the return shape (redundant but harmless given the output schema exists), the approval gate, and the follow-up call. An agent has enough to decide, invoke, and then correctly route to apply_proposal or an approve link.

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 coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3, but the description adds real meaning: 'only what is given changes' clarifies partial-update semantics that the values bag alone does not, and it reinforces the 25-item limit on items. The instruction to never choose the system on the person's behalf and to ask which AI agent they mean adds usage semantics beyond the schema's own system description.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description states a specific action and object: it prepares new values for an existing item of an arbitrary kind (product price, coupon, custom record, pipeline stages) without writing them. It clearly distinguishes itself from reading tools (search_records, get_record) and names apply_proposal as the execution step. It is weaker on separating itself from semantically adjacent siblings like propose_update_fields or propose_update_task — the phrase 'an item next to the six record types' is vague about which tool covers which resource.

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?

Strong when-to-use framing: only inside a system whose AI agent may change records, and only when the person asks. The when-not is explicit ('Not for reading — use search_records or get_record') and the post-call workflow is spelled out: show the person, disclose outgoing notifications, ask permission, then call apply_proposal, or share the approve link when needsApproval is true. The gap is that no alternative update-style proposal tool is named, so an agent must infer which propose_update_* variant to pick.

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

All CRM Connector 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