Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
hubspot-pipeline-mcp

hubspot-pipeline-mcp

by RynoJor
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Remote

Find duplicate contacts

find_duplicate_contacts
Read-onlyIdempotent

Detect duplicate HubSpot contacts by matching mailbox (ignoring case and dots) or similar company names, and surface the open deal value at risk from duplicated pipeline.

Instructions

Duplicate contacts: the same mailbox (case and dots ignored), or the same company with a matching name ('Steve' ~ 'Steven', 'N. Galloway' ~ 'Nina Galloway').

usd_at_risk is the open deal value sitting on the duplicates (pipeline counted twice). Rows list duplicate_id, original_id, match_type, reason and open_deal_ids.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "find_duplicate_contacts"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNoMax rows to list (totals always cover every match).

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A3.9/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive and closed-world, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds real behavioral context beyond that: the exact matching heuristics, that usd_at_risk represents double-counted open pipeline value, and what a row contains. It stops short of saying how much of the contact base is scanned or whether matches are limited to one owner/workspace.

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?

Three short, front-loaded paragraphs: matching criteria first, then the meaning of the key metric, then row shape. The enumeration of row fields partially duplicates the existing output schema, which is mild waste, but nothing else is padded.

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 annotations, a fully described single parameter, and an output schema present, the description needs only to explain the matching logic and the semantics of usd_at_risk — and it does. Minor gaps remain around scan scope (all contacts vs. a filtered subset) and whether the result set is stable across calls.

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?

One parameter with 100% schema coverage — the schema fully documents 'limit' including its default and 1–200 range plus the important note that totals cover every match regardless of limit. The description adds no parameter meaning of its own, so the baseline 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?

Specific resource (duplicate contacts) with the matching rules spelled out precisely: same mailbox ignoring case and dots, or same company with a fuzzy name match, including worked examples ('Steve' ~ 'Steven'). This is distinguishable from the deal-oriented siblings without opening any schema.

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?

Usage is implied rather than stated — an agent can infer you call this to surface duplicate contacts, and the sibling list (find_stalled_deals, pipeline_summary, etc.) has little overlap, so alternatives matter less. However, there is no explicit when-to-use framing and no exclusions, such as whether this only covers contacts with open deals or whether deduplication is a separate step.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools