FavCRM

This connector has been deprecated

This connector has been replaced by https://glama.ai/mcp/connectors/io.favcrm/favcrm/admin

search_tools

Read-onlyIdempotent

Search the available FavCRM tool catalog for relevant operations. Use this when the curated direct tool list does not contain the operation you need.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`limit`	No	Maximum results (default 8, max 20)
`query`	No	Plain-language tool search, e.g. "delete a segment" or "set custom field values"
`scope`	No	Optional exact scope filter, e.g. contacts, customer_segments, invoices
`write`	No	Filter to write tools (true) or read-only tools (false)
`includeInputSchema`	No	Include full JSON input schemas for returned tools. Defaults to false to keep context small.

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

A4.5/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false. The description adds context that this is a search over the tool catalog, which is consistent. However, it does not go into further behavioral details, but given the annotations, this is sufficient.

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?

The description is two sentences, front-loaded with the main action, and every word serves a purpose. No fluff.

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 the presence of an output schema (though not provided to us) and the simplicity of the tool, the description is complete enough. It explains the tool's function and its role relative to sibling tools.

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%, so all parameters are already documented in the schema. The description does not add extra meaning beyond what the schema provides. Baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 the tool's purpose: searching the tool catalog for relevant operations. It distinguishes itself from the many sibling tools by specifying it is for when the curated direct tool list does not contain the needed operation.

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?

The description explicitly advises when to use this tool: 'Use this when the curated direct tool list does not contain the operation you need.' This provides clear guidance on when to choose this tool over the specific operation tools.

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?