Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Zoho_crm

by io.github.pipeworx-io
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Zoho Search Records

zoho_search_records
Read-onlyIdempotent

Search records in a Zoho CRM module using criteria.

Example tool call

This call uses example arguments supplied in the tool’s input schema.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "module": "Contacts",
      "criteria": "(Last_Name:equals:Smith)"
    },
    "name": "zoho_search_records"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
pageNoPage number (default 1)
moduleYesModule name (e.g., Leads, Contacts, Deals)
criteriaYesSearch criteria (e.g., "(Last_Name:equals:Smith)")
per_pageNoRecords per page (max 200, default 20)

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
dataNoArray of records matching search criteria
errorNoError code if connection not available
messageNoError message if connection not available

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "properties": {
+    "data": {
+      "description": "Array of records matching search criteria",
+      "items": {
+        "description": "Record object matching the criteria",
+        "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: +[
+  {
+    "criteria": "(Last_Name:equals:Smith)",
+    "module": "Contacts"
+  },
+  {
+    "criteria": "(Email:contains:example.com)",
+    "module": "Leads",
+    "per_page": 100
+  }
+]
  3. First observed

TDQS

B3.1/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the agent knows this is a safe read operation. The description adds no extra behavioral context, such as response format, pagination behavior, or rate limits. It does not contradict the annotations but also provides no value beyond the purpose.

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 of 11 words, extremely concise and front-loaded. Every word is necessary; there is no fluff, repetition, or unnecessary detail.

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?

Given the strong input schema and annotations, the description is minimally sufficient. However, it does not provide context on when to use this search tool over sibling list tools, which could cause ambiguous tool selection. The output schema exists, so return values are covered, but the missing alternative guidance is a noticeable gap.

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?

The input schema already provides complete descriptions for all four parameters, including examples, achieving 100% coverage. The description does not add additional semantics beyond the schema, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 clearly states the tool's function: searching records in a Zoho CRM module using criteria. It uses a specific verb ('search') and resource ('records in a Zoho CRM module'), making the purpose understandable. However, it does not explicitly distinguish this tool from the sibling 'zoho_list_records', which may also perform similar operations, so it lacks sibling differentiation.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description gives no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like zoho_list_records or zoho_get_record. It does not mention whether this is the appropriate choice for filtered searches or if list_records is better for unfiltered lists. This omission could lead an agent to select the wrong tool.

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
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