Skip to main content
Glama

Zoho_crm

by io.github.pipeworx-io

Zoho Create Record

zoho_create_record
Idempotent

Create a new record in a Zoho CRM module.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
dataYesRecord data as key-value pairs (e.g., { "Last_Name": "Smith", "Email": "john@example.com" })
moduleYesModule name (e.g., Leads, Contacts, Deals)

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
dataNoArray containing the created record response
errorNoError code if connection not available
messageNoError message if connection not available

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "properties": {
+    "data": {
+      "description": "Array containing the created record response",
+      "items": {
+        "description": "Created record with ID and details",
+        "type": "object"
+      },
+      "type": "array"
+    },
+    "error": {
+      "description": "Error code if connection not available",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "message": {
+      "description": "Error message if connection not available",
+      "type": "string"
+    }
+  },
+  "type": "object"
+}
  2. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / examples
      Added value: +[
+  {
+    "data": {
+      "Email": "jane.johnson@example.com",
+      "Last_Name": "Johnson",
+      "Phone": "555-1234"
+    },
+    "module": "Contacts"
+  }
+]
  3. First observed

TDQS

B3.4/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

The description adds no behavioral context beyond the annotations. It doesn't mention return behavior, idempotency implications (despite idempotentHint=true), or requirements. With annotations already indicating a write operation, the description provides no additional transparency.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single, clear sentence that is easy to parse. It slightly duplicates the title but is efficient and front-loaded. No unnecessary 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?

For a simple two-parameter tool with an output schema, the description covers the basic action but misses context like module-specific required fields, error handling, or idempotency notes. It's minimally sufficient but has gaps.

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% with both module and data documented. The description itself does not add parameter details, so the baseline score of 3 applies.

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 uses a specific verb 'Create' and identifies the resource 'record in Zoho CRM module', clearly differentiating from sibling Zoho tools that get, list, or search records. It directly states the tool's function.

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 (when you need to insert a new record into a Zoho CRM module), but it doesn't explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives, nor does it mention prerequisites like module existence or required fields. It's clear from the name but lacks explicit guidance.

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

All Zoho_crm toolsInspect
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

B3.3/5.0
Disambiguation2/5

The five Zoho CRM tools are well-differentiated, but the 31 Pipeworx/Polymarket tools create heavy overlap (e.g., ask_pipeworx, ask_pipeworx_beta, ask_pipeworx_grounded, deep_research all serve similar lookup purposes). Mixing two unrelated domains makes it easy for an agent to select a tool from the wrong group.

Naming Consistency2/5

The Zoho tools share a consistent zoho_ prefix, but the remaining 31 tools follow no clear convention—ask_pipeworx, bet_research, deep_research, entity_profile, forget, scan_dependency, etc. mix noun-first, verb-first, and bare verb patterns without a unifying scheme.

Tool Count2/5

36 tools is well beyond what a Zoho CRM server needs, and only 5 actually relate to Zoho CRM. The bulk are for unrelated data sources, prediction markets, memory management, and web generation, making the set feel bloated and unfocused.

Completeness2/5

The Zoho CRM surface includes create, get, list, and search, but omits essential operations like update, delete, and upsert. The other 31 tools cover a completely different domain, so the server fails to provide complete lifecycle coverage for its stated purpose.

Resources