data_export
Export all CRM data as a JSON object (contacts, relationships, notes, activities, life events, reminders, gifts, debts, tasks, tags)
Input Schema
TableJSON Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Mob (Demo)
TDQS
A3.7/5.0
Behavior2/5
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It does not state whether the operation is read-only, any rate limits, authentication requirements, or response structure beyond 'JSON object'. This lack of behavioral context could leave an agent uncertain about side effects or constraints.
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 a single sentence that is front-loaded with the core action ('Export all CRM data as a JSON object') and then lists included data types. It is concise, scannable, and contains no redundant or filler content.
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?
The description adequately states what is exported and the format, but it does not describe the JSON structure (e.g., whether it is a flat object with arrays per category) or any constraints like size limits or pagination. Since there is no output schema, this missing information leaves some gaps for an agent using the tool.
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?
The tool has zero parameters, and the input schema is empty. With no parameters, there is nothing to document, and the description correctly adds no parameter-specific information. Baseline of 4 applies because parameter semantics are trivially satisfied.
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 exports all CRM data as a JSON object, listing specific data categories (contacts, relationships, notes, etc.). This specific verb+resource combination distinguishes it from siblings like data_statistics (statistics) or contact_list (individual contacts).
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?
The description implies usage for full-dataset export, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it mention exclusions. For example, it does not say 'for individual records use contact_list' or 'for statistics use data_statistics'. The usage context is clear but not explicitly contrasted with other tools.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Try in Browser
Glama MCP Gateway
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
TDQS
B3.4/5.0
Disambiguation4/5
Most tools are clearly distinct by entity, but contact_get and contact_timeline overlap significantly, and debt_manage's action='list' duplicates what other entities do with a dedicated list tool. Descriptions are detailed enough to resolve most ambiguity, though.
Naming Consistency3/5
Tool names are mostly snake_case and readable, but they mix conventions: noun_verb (contact_create), verb_noun (batch_create_activities), and descriptive phrases (contacts_needing_attention). The noun_manage pattern is dominant, but the lack of uniformity makes the naming less predictable.
Tool Count2/5
With 42 tools, the surface is very large, even for a full-featured CRM. Many tools bundle multiple actions, but the sheer number forces an agent to consider many options, increasing selection difficulty and cognitive load.
Completeness5/5
The server provides comprehensive CRM coverage: contacts, activities, notes, tasks, reminders, gifts, debts, relationships, tags, custom fields, notifications, settings, and exports. It supports batch operations, duplicate detection, merge, and special queries, leaving few if any obvious gaps.