Retrieve the CRM sales pipeline with its stages and per-stage deal counts to see where deals stand, optionally narrowed to one pipeline by ID.
Get the CRM sales pipeline with its stages and per-stage deal counts — the 'where are my deals' overview. Optionally narrow to one pipeline by ID. Requires the Sales module.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| pipeline_id | No | Optional pipeline ID to narrow to one pipeline when the org has several |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.2.9Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It usefully discloses a module dependency and the aggregate nature of the response, but it never states read-only/no-side-effect behavior or permission requirements beyond the module gate, leaving the mutation profile implicit.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Two sentences, front-loaded with the purpose and return contents, then the optional parameter and prerequisite. No filler and nothing is buried.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
For a single-optional-param read tool with no output schema, the description covers what the tool returns (stages and per-stage deal counts) and the module prerequisite. It is complete enough to call correctly, with only minor gaps like pagination or multi-pipeline ordering.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema coverage is 100% and the single parameter is fully described in the schema, so the baseline is 3. The description only restates that pipeline_id optionally narrows to one pipeline, adding no syntax or edge-case detail beyond the schema.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description states a specific verb and resource ('Get the CRM sales pipeline') and even describes the return shape ('stages and per-stage deal counts'). The 'where are my deals' overview framing implicitly separates it from deal-level siblings like get_deal/search_deals, but no alternative is named explicitly.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
It gives a prerequisite ('Requires the Sales module') and notes the parameter is an optional narrowing filter, which implies when the tool applies. However, it offers no explicit when-to-use/when-not guidance or routing against the many sibling search/get tools.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.