ClassQuill MCP server

get_lead

Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieves a specific lead's details from ClassQuill tutoring-business data using its UUID. Enables AI tools to access lead information for a given lead ID.

Instructions

Get Lead

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`lead_id`	Yes	Lead UUID

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`id`	Yes
`name`	No
`email`	No
`notes`	No
`phone`	No
`status`	No
`form_id`	No
`subject`	No
`created_at`	No
`source_url`	No
`updated_at`	No
`converted_at`	No
`source_form_name`	No
`assigned_tutor_id`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.4Aug 30, 2026

TDQS

D1.9/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

The description discloses no behavioral traits beyond what the annotations already state (readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive, openWorld). It adds no extra context such as error behavior, return semantics, or how the openWorldHint affects lookup results.

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

Conciseness2/5

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

The description is extremely short, but this is under-specification rather than genuine conciseness. It consists solely of a two-word restatement of the tool name and offers no structured information.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness2/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Even though the input schema and annotations are helpful, the description fails to explain what a lead is, how it fits into the domain, or how to obtain a valid lead_id. The tool cannot be correctly selected based on this description alone.

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% and the lead_id parameter is described as 'Lead UUID', so the schema already provides complete parameter documentation. The description adds no additional meaning, so the baseline of 3 applies.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose1/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description 'Get Lead' is a pure restatement of the tool name and annotation title. It names a verb and resource but adds no detail about what a lead is or how this operation is distinguished from the many sibling get_* tools.

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?

There is no guidance about when to use this tool versus alternatives such as list_leads or other get_* tools. No context, preconditions, or exclusions are provided.

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

Deploy Server