Skip to main content
Glama

Import your own lead list

import_leads
Read-only

Clean your own list (CSV text with an email column, optional company, name, website) into leads: drops invalid, duplicate, already-emailed, public-sector, role-mailbox (info@, support@) and no-mail-server addresses, and says why. A list that is mostly unmailable is refused whole. confirmOwnList must be true: it records the caller's statement that these are business contacts they have a reason to write to and that the list was not bought, rented or scraped in bulk.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "csv": "<csv>",
      "confirmOwnList": "<confirmOwnList>"
    },
    "name": "import_leads"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
csvYesCSV text, up to 500 rows
confirmOwnListYesTrue confirms this is your own list of business contacts, not a bought, rented or scraped one.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / confirmOwnList / description
      Previous value: -"Must be true: this is your own list of business contacts, not a bought, rented or scraped one."New value: +"True confirms this is your own list of business contacts, not a bought, rented or scraped one."
  2. First observed

TDQS

A4.1/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Goes well past the annotations by disclosing the filtering rules, the refusal threshold for mostly-unmailable lists, and the fact that the call fails unless confirmOwnList is true and that the attestation is recorded. One tension worth noting: 'import ... into leads' and 'it records the caller's statement' read like persistence, while readOnlyHint=true declares no side effects; the description never clarifies that no records are written, leaving a small ambiguity an agent must resolve.

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?

Front-loaded with the core action, then the drop rules, then the refusal condition, then the required confirmation — a logical order with no filler sentences. It is dense and multi-clause, but each clause carries operational information, so little could be cut without losing meaning.

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?

With only two parameters, full schema coverage and no output schema, the definition covers input shape, validation behavior and the mandatory attestation. It stops short of describing what comes back (cleaned leads plus per-row rejection reasons) or row/rate limits beyond the schema's 500-row note, but those are minor omissions for a tool of this size.

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 coverage is 100%, so both parameters are already documented, and the description largely restates confirmOwnList's meaning. It does add genuine beyond-schema detail for csv, specifying an email column with optional company, name and website, which the schema does not. That extra column contract is the only real semantic contribution, so it sits near the baseline rather than above it.

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?

Specific verb plus resource: a CSV lead list is 'cleaned into leads' with an explicit enumeration of what is dropped (invalid, duplicate, already-emailed, public-sector, role-mailbox, no-mail-server). This is clearly distinct from the sibling list_/set_/send_ tools, which neither ingest CSV nor validate addresses.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

The description establishes the context of use (your own list, business contacts you have a reason to write to) and a hard exclusion ('a list that is mostly unmailable is refused whole'), which shapes when the call will succeed. It does not name an alternative path for users who want to upload bought or scraped data, so the routing is implied rather than explicit.

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.

Resources