Meta Council

Get Sales Recommendations

get_sales_recommendations

Read-onlyIdempotent

The caller's prioritized next-best sales actions: interested leads to convert, open deals gone stale enough to need a follow-up, and overdue tasks — each with a rationale and the exact governed tool to run next (convert_lead_to_deal / log_deal_activity / complete_sales_task) plus its arguments. Read-only; ranks the caller's own CRM data (overdue > convert > follow-up). Nothing is executed or sent — approve an item by calling the named write tool. Requires authentication.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`text`	Yes

TDQS

A4.9/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Discloses read-only nature, ranking logic (overdue > convert > follow-up), that it operates on caller's own CRM data, and that it requires authentication, complementing annotations (readOnlyHint, idempotentHint). No contradiction.

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?

All sentences are essential, well-organized, and front-loaded with the main purpose. No redundancy, under 150 words.

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?

Given there is an output schema, the description appropriately covers the items returned, rationale, and next steps without needing to detail return values. Complete for a read-only recommendation 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?

Input schema has zero parameters, so description doesn't need to add parameter details. Baseline score of 4 is appropriate as per guidelines.

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 it delivers 'prioritized next-best sales actions' specifying the types (interested leads, stale deals, overdue tasks) and distinguishes from siblings by being read-only and recommending specific write tools.

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 when to use (to get next actions) and when not (nothing is executed/sent), provides alternatives (convert_lead_to_deal, log_deal_activity, complete_sales_task), and mentions authentication requirement.

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

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

A3.6/5.0

Disambiguation5/5

Every tool targets a distinct resource and action, with detailed descriptions that clearly separate overlapping domains (e.g., consulting vs. marketing vs. outreach). Even within the same domain, tools like 'create_consulting_deliverable' and 'create_consulting_document_revision' are unambiguous due to their specific nouns.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tools follow a consistent verb_noun snake_case pattern (e.g., 'create_invoice', 'get_deal', 'list_agents'). The few exceptions like 'locus_determine_from_scores' still adhere to the verb_noun structure and do not break the pattern.

Tool Count1/5

With 124 tools, the server is massively over-scoped for typical MCP use. The tool count far exceeds the '50+ extreme mismatch' threshold, making it nearly impossible for an agent to efficiently navigate or select the right tool without extensive context. Even a large platform should consolidate or expose fewer tools.

Completeness5/5

The tool surface covers CRUD and lifecycle operations across at least 10 domains (sales, consulting, marketing, outreach, accounting, workflows, ticketing, API keys, feedback, platform metrics). Each domain appears to have no obvious gaps—e.g., invoicing includes create, update, send, mark paid, void; ticketing includes create, update, archive, dependencies, batch, scenarios, validation.

Resources

Need Help?