Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Sautikit

by io.github.SautiKit
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

desk_create_lead

Opens a SautiDesk lead for a contact (contact_id, to, or ticket_id). A contact who already has an open lead gets it back (opened false). A source is required unless the ticket's channel gives one.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "desk_create_lead"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
toNophone number or email of somebody who may not be a contact yet
nameNooptional name when using to
tagsNooptional tag UUIDs
purposeNoRequired on tools that read data or reports; recommended on every tool. One sentence: what you are doing and why (for example "finding this caller's open ticket to answer them"). Building a report, dashboard, analytics or an export is a SautiDesk Pro feature done by the report tools, not by pulling records.
currencyNooptional ISO 4217 currency; the workspace's by default
owner_idNooptional owner user UUID (someone else needs the Supervisor licence)
queue_idNooptional queue UUID
stage_idNooptional open stage UUID; the first stage by default
source_idNolead source UUID; required unless the ticket's channel gives one
ticket_idNomake the lead from this ticket (its contact, queue and channel source)
contact_idNocontact UUID (or give to, or ticket_id)
temperatureNooptional: hot, warm (default) or cold
value_minorNooptional deal value in minor units (cents)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Added

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations only declare openWorldHint=false and destructiveHint=false, so the description carries the disclosure burden and does well: it reveals idempotent get-or-create behavior ('a contact who already has an open lead gets it back (opened false)'), which an agent could not infer from annotations or schema. It omits permission/licence requirements for owner assignment, which only appear buried in the schema.

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 short sentences, front-loaded with the action and the identifier options, followed by the idempotency rule and the source precondition. No filler or restated title.

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?

For a 13-parameter mutation with no output schema, the description covers the two things an agent most needs: how to identify the contact and what happens on a duplicate. Remaining gaps (defaults for stage, temperature, currency, and the shape of the returned lead) are handled by the rich schema, so nothing critical is missing.

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%, and the description's param-level statements ('contact_id, to, or ticket_id', the source rule) largely restate what the schema properties already say. It does clarify that the three identifiers are alternatives rather than combinable, which adds marginal value, so it sits at the baseline rather than above it.

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 opens with a specific verb plus resource ('Opens a SautiDesk lead') and immediately names the three acceptable contact identifiers, so an agent knows this creates a lead rather than a contact or ticket. It is clear without needing to name a sibling explicitly, though it never contrasts itself with desk_create_contact or desk_update_lead.

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 implied rather than stated: 'A source is required unless the ticket's channel gives one' tells the agent a precondition for one path, and the duplicate-lead rule hints at when this acts as a get-or-create. There is no explicit when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or alternative (e.g. desk_create_contact vs desk_lookup_contact first).

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

All Sautikit toolsInspect
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