SmartSuite MCP Server

smartsuite_search_records

Read-only

Search SmartSuite records using a text query across specified fields, with pagination, result limits, and compact or JSON output options.

Instructions

Search records using a text query across specified fields.

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": {
      "applicationId": "<applicationId>",
      "query": "<query>"
    },
    "name": "smartsuite_search_records"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`limit`	No	Max records to return (default 25)
`query`	Yes	Text to search for
`cursor`	No	Pagination cursor
`format`	No	"json" (default) or "compact" columns+rows table (fewer tokens for large result sets).
`fieldSlugs`	No	Field slugs to search within
`applicationId`	Yes	The application ID
`includeFieldContext`	No	When true, adds a _fieldContext map to the response.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.9.8Jul 29, 2026

TDQS

B3.4/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the description's contribution is minimal. It adds no additional behavioral context such as performance implications, rate limits, or edge cases. The description does not contradict annotations.

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?

The description is a single, clear sentence of 10 words, with no extraneous information. It is appropriately concise for a simple tool, though it could benefit from slightly more structure.

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 tool has 7 parameters (2 required) and no output schema, the description is somewhat minimal. It does not describe the return format or pagination behavior, but the tool's purpose is straightforward enough that the description is adequate.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents all parameters. The description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema, meeting the baseline expectation.

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?

The description clearly states the action ('Search records'), the resource ('records'), and the scope ('using a text query across specified fields'). It effectively distinguishes this from sibling tools like 'list_records' or 'get_record' by focusing on text-based search.

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?

The description implies usage for full-text search but does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., 'list_records' or 'query_records'). No when-not-to-use or alternative references are included.

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

Deploy Server