Relaticle

List Companies

list-companies-tool

Read-onlyIdempotent

List companies in the CRM with optional filters and pagination.

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`page`	No	Page number (max 1,000,000).
`sort`	No	Sort by field. Properties: field (string), direction (asc\|desc).
`filter`	No	An object of conditions. Keys starting with $ are keywords: operators ($eq, $contains, $is_empty, $gt, $gte, $lt, $lte, $has_any, $has_none, $in, $not_in) and logic ($and and $or take a list of condition objects, $not takes one and also returns records where the inner fields are empty). Other keys are names. A filter holds at most 20 conditions, 3 levels of $and, $or and $not, and 2 levels of relations. A list holds at most 100 values. Email values match in any letter case. Phone values match in any format, and the operand needs a country code such as +1 415 555 0100. Link values match in any letter case, with or without the scheme. Domain values match as a bare host or a full URL, with or without www. Tags-input values match the exact stored value. Date-time values match a date without a time, such as 2026-10-01, as that whole day. Email and link fields also take a domain sub-field with $in or $not_in, such as {"domain":{"$in":["acme.com"]}}, which matches the host of each value. $not_in and $has_none also match records where the field is empty. $is_empty takes true or false. Native fields: name, created_at, updated_at, creation_source. Relations take $in, $not_in or $is_empty on record ids, or conditions on the related record that use that record type's own filter names, including custom_fields. Prefer conditions over listing the related records first and passing their ids: people (people), opportunities (opportunity). Member relations take $in, $not_in or $is_empty on workspace member ids only, with no nested conditions: creator, accountOwner. custom_fields takes an object keyed by custom field code, each value an operator object. Native fields and relations sit at the top level of filter. get-crm-schema-tool lists those codes with their type and options under filterable_fields.custom_fields, and the operators, matching rule and example of each type under filterable_fields.types. Example: {"name":{"$contains":"Acme"},"$or":[{"creation_source":{"$eq":"api"}},{"created_at":{"$gte":"2026-01-01"}}]}.
`include`	No	Singular relationships or relationship counts to expand. Use a show tool for to-many records.
`per_page`	No	Results per page (default 15, max 25).

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`page`	Yes
`items`	Yes
`total`	Yes
`has_more`	Yes
`per_page`	Yes
`next_page`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedNov 2, 2026

TDQS

A3.5/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, non-destructive and closed-world, so the safety profile is fully covered. The description adds only that results are filtered and paginated; it does not mention page-size caps, page limits, or how the two interact, which the schema covers instead.

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?

A single well-formed sentence, front-loaded with the resource and scoped by the two modifiers. No filler and no restatement of the title.

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?

An output schema exists and the filter schema is exhaustive, so most burden is offloaded. However, for a list tool with 5 params and nested objects, the description gives no hint about result ordering, the 25-per-page cap's practical effect on large result sets, or that to-many expansion must go through show tools—gaps an agent would hit at call time.

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 description coverage is 100%, including a very detailed filter grammar, so the schema carries the full burden. The description adds nothing beyond naming the existence of filters and pagination—the baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 gives a specific verb and resource ('List companies in the CRM') plus the modifiers (filters, pagination). It is easily distinguished from create-company-tool and get-company-tool by the verb, though it never names a sibling explicitly.

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?

Usage is only implied: 'with optional filters and pagination' suggests this is the collection-retrieval endpoint, but there is no statement about when to choose it over get-company-tool (single record) or list-people-tool (other entity types), and no exclusions.

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

All Relaticle 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.