Meta Council

Create Deal

create_deal

Create a sales deal owned by the caller. Provide a title, or a lead_id to inherit the lead's company/name as the title. The deal appears live on the owner's Sales board. No deletes are exposed over MCP.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "create_deal"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`notes`	No
`stage`	No	Pipeline stage (default qualification).
`title`	No	Deal title (required unless lead_id is given).
`amount`	No	Deal value (>= 0).
`company`	No
`lead_id`	No	Link to an existing owned lead.
`currency`	No	Exactly three ASCII letters, such as USD; saved uppercase. Omit for USD. Syntax only, not an ISO registry.
`campaign_id`	No	Link to an owned campaign.
`probability`	No	Win probability 0-100.
`expected_close_date`	No	ISO date YYYY-MM-DD.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedSep 15, 2026

changedOutput schema / (root)

Previous value: -{
-  "additionalProperties": false,
-  "properties": {
-    "text": {
-      "type": "string"
-    }
-  },
-  "required": [
-    "text"
-  ],
-  "type": "object"
-}New value: +null

Changed2 schema fields changedSep 10, 2026

changedInput schema / properties / currency / description

Previous value: -"3-letter ISO code (default USD)."New value: +"Exactly three ASCII letters, such as USD; saved uppercase. Omit for USD. Syntax only, not an ISO registry."

addedInput schema / properties / currency / pattern
```
Added value: +"^[A-Za-z]{3}$"
```

AddedJul 19, 2026

TDQS

A3.9/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Beyond the annotations (readOnlyHint false, destructiveHint false), the description adds meaningful behavioral context: the deal 'appears live on the owner's Sales board' and 'No deletes are exposed over MCP.' This clarifies immediate visibility and the absence of a delete operation, which is helpful for the agent's expectations.

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?

Three sentences, each with a distinct purpose: core action, parameter guidance, and behavioral note. There is no fluff, and the most important information is front-loaded. The description is appropriately sized for the tool's complexity.

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?

For a create tool with 10 optional parameters and no output schema, the description covers the essential runtime behavior (live board visibility, no deletes, ownership) and the critical title/lead_id relationship. It does not explicitly state the mutual exclusivity or what happens if both are provided, but the schema and description cover enough for an agent to correctly invoke the tool.

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 description coverage is 80%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds value by clarifying the relationship between title and lead_id (one is needed, lead_id inherits the lead's company/name as title) and emphasizing caller ownership. This goes beyond the schema's individual field descriptions, justifying a 4.

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 clearly states the tool creates a sales deal owned by the caller, which is a specific verb+resource. It is distinguishable from siblings like update_deal, convert_lead_to_deal, and create_invoice, though it does not explicitly name them. The ownership detail adds useful differentiation, but a direct sibling comparison would make it a 5.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

The description gives some parameter guidance ('Provide a title, or a lead_id...') and notes the deal appears live, but it does not explicitly explain when to use this tool versus alternatives such as convert_lead_to_deal for lead conversion or update_deal for modifications. The context is implied rather than explicit, so no strong when-not guidance.

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

All Meta Council tools Inspect

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

Need Help?