FavCRM

This connector has been deprecated

This connector has been replaced by https://glama.ai/mcp/connectors/io.favcrm/favcrm/admin

create_promotion

Create a promotion / discount code. type=percentage or fixed_amount; value is the discount as a string ("10" = 10% or 10 currency units). Codes are uppercased server-side.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`code`	Yes	Coupon code customers enter at checkout (auto-uppercased)
`name`	Yes	Promotion name (internal)
`type`	No	Default percentage
`value`	Yes	Discount value as decimal string
`endsAt`	No	ISO datetime — when the promo expires
`status`	No	Default active
`startsAt`	No	ISO datetime — when the promo becomes valid
`posEnabled`	No	Allow at POS
`description`	No	Description
`eventEnabled`	No	Allow on event registrations
`minimumAmount`	No	Minimum order amount required, decimal string
`onlineEnabled`	No	Allow on online shop orders
`bookingEnabled`	No	Allow on bookings
`maximumDiscount`	No	Cap on percentage discounts, decimal string
`minimumQuantity`	No	Minimum item count required
`usageLimitTotal`	No	Max total uses across all customers
`usageLimitPerCustomer`	No	Max uses per single customer

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`data`	Yes	Tool result payload — shape varies per tool, see the tool description
`summary`	Yes	One-line human-readable summary of the action
`renderType`	Yes	UI rendering hint for the result

TDQS

A4.4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations show readOnlyHint=false, indicating mutation. Description adds behavioral details: type enum constraints, value as decimal string, and server-side uppercasing. No contradictions with annotations. Adequate but could mention creation specifics (e.g., returns created resource).

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, front-loaded with purpose. No redundant information. Every sentence adds value. Well-structured for quick parsing.

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?

Given 17 parameters and existing output schema, description covers core purpose and key parameter semantics. Missing explanation of optional fields (e.g., dates, limits) but schema descriptions fill that gap. Sufficient for agent to use correctly.

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 100%, so baseline is 3. Description adds extra meaning beyond schema: explains the type enum and how value is interpreted (percentage or currency units). Provides context for required parameters beyond schema descriptions.

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 'Create a promotion / discount code' with specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from siblings like update_promotion by explaining the type and value fields. The resource is well-defined.

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?

Provides clear usage context: type can be percentage or fixed_amount, value is a string representing the discount. Notes that codes are uppercased server-side. However, no explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs. alternatives like update_promotion or validate_promotion.

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

All FavCRM 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

Each tool targets a distinct resource and action, with clear descriptions that minimize ambiguity. Even related tools like create_post vs create_post_type are well-separated by their targets.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tools follow a consistent verb_noun pattern (e.g., create_account, list_services, update_post), with no mixing of naming conventions. The pattern is predictable throughout the set.

Tool Count1/5

190 tools is excessively large for any server, far exceeding the typical 3-15 tool range. The sheer volume overwhelms agents and suggests poor scoping, even for a comprehensive CRM platform.

Completeness4/5

The tool set covers CRUD operations across many domains (CRM, bookings, marketing, CMS, etc.), but notable gaps exist (e.g., no delete_account, delete_contact, update_booking). These are minor given the vast surface.

Resources

Need Help?