Meta Council

Update Deal

update_deal

Destructive

Update one of the caller's deals — most commonly to ADVANCE its stage (e.g. discovery -> proposal). Moving to closed_won/closed_lost stamps the close date; reopening to an open stage clears it. Only the fields you pass change; deal_id is required.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`notes`	No
`stage`	No
`title`	No
`amount`	No
`company`	No
`deal_id`	Yes
`currency`	No	Exactly three ASCII letters, such as USD; saved uppercase. Omit to keep the current currency. Syntax only, not an ISO registry.
`probability`	No
`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

addedInput schema / properties / currency / description

Added value: +"Exactly three ASCII letters, such as USD; saved uppercase. Omit to keep the current currency. Syntax only, not an ISO registry."

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

AddedJul 19, 2026

TDQS

A4.1/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already flag destructive=true and idempotent=false, but the description adds real behavioral detail: closed_won/closed_lost stamp the close date and reopening clears it, and only passed fields change. These side effects are not derivable from 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?

Three tight sentences, front-loaded with the common case, then side effects, then partial-update semantics. No filler.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a 9-parameter mutation tool with no output schema and low schema coverage, this covers the key behaviors (partial update, stage transitions) but omits the meaning of most fields and any description of the response. Adequate but with visible gaps.

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 only 22% across 9 params, so the description carries more burden than usual. It adds genuine meaning for the stage parameter (close-date side effects) and confirms deal_id is required, but most other parameters (amount, currency, probability, dates) get no explanatory help.

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?

Specific verb (update) plus resource (deal) and scope (the caller's deals), with the dominant use case (stage advancement) called out. It is clearly distinguishable from siblings like create_deal, get_deal, and log_deal_activity.

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?

Gives clear context ('most commonly to ADVANCE its stage') so the agent knows the primary scenario. However, it names no alternatives or when-not conditions (e.g. convert_deal_to_invoice or log_deal_activity for non-mutating cases).

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?