dealdesk-mcp

dealdesk.create_quote_from_configuration

Create a quote from a published CPQ portfolio configuration; optional quote layout controls grouping and editability, while commercial amounts stay server-evaluated.

Instructions

Create a quote from a published Portfolio configuration (CPQ). Optional quoteLayout shapes groups/optional/editable presentation; commercial amounts stay server-evaluated.

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`title`	No
`locale`	No
`currency`	No
`language`	No
`companyId`	No
`contactId`	No
`projectId`	No	DealDesk project id. Omit when the OAuth token or API key authorizes exactly one project. Required when Connect authorized several projects.
`quoteLayout`	No	Allowlisted presentation: groups, roles, quantityEditable, selectionType, …
`configuration`	Yes	CPQ configuration with selections[] and optional context
`customerReference`	No
`portfolioRevisionId`	Yes
`priceBookRevisionId`	Yes

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`quote`	Yes	Quote status, totals, and optional analytics/shares. Extra fields live on this object, not beside it.
`idempotentReplay`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed4 schema fields changedv0.1.1Oct 7, 2026

changedInput schema / properties / projectId / description

Previous value: -"DealDesk project id (must match API key / OAuth project)"New value: +"DealDesk project id. Omit when the OAuth token or API key authorizes exactly one project. Required when Connect authorized several projects."

changedInput schema / required

Previous value: -[
-  "projectId",
-  "portfolioRevisionId",
-  "priceBookRevisionId",
-  "configuration"
-]New value: +[
+  "portfolioRevisionId",
+  "priceBookRevisionId",
+  "configuration"
+]

changedOutput schema / additionalProperties
```
Previous value: -falseNew value: +true
```

changedOutput schema / properties / quote / description

Previous value: -"Quote summary shown in the quote-totals widget"New value: +"Quote status, totals, and optional analytics/shares. Extra fields live on this object, not beside it."

First observedv0.1.0Sep 30, 2026

TDQS

B3.1/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full disclosure burden. It usefully reveals that quoteLayout only shapes presentation and that commercial amounts 'stay server-evaluated' (server-side computation, not client-supplied) - valuable context. However, it omits permission requirements, the failure mode for unpublished configurations, and mutation/irreversibility details for what is clearly a write operation.

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?

Two compact sentences with the core action front-loaded and no wasted wording. The second sentence adds constraints efficiently, though the phrasing ('shapes groups/optional/editable presentation') is dense enough to border on terse.

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?

For a mutation tool with 12 parameters, nested objects, and no annotations, the description is thin. An output schema exists so return values needn't be explained, but prerequisites ('published' configuration), the relationship between configuration/priceBookRevisionId, and behavioral expectations for a CPQ quote creation are left unaddressed.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters2/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is only 25% across 12 parameters, so the description needs to compensate but largely does not. It clarifies quoteLayout's presentational role and that amounts are server-evaluated, but says nothing about title, locale, currency, language, companyId, contactId, customerReference, portfolioRevisionId, or priceBookRevisionId, leaving most parameters undocumented.

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

Purpose4/5

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

The description states a specific verb and resource ('Create a quote') and names the source mechanism ('from a published Portfolio configuration (CPQ)'), which meaningfully separates it from the plain create_quote and clone_quote siblings. It stops short of explicitly naming those alternatives, but an agent can still distinguish the CPQ-driven path from a plain quote creation.

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 only implied via the phrase 'from a published Portfolio configuration,' which hints at the prerequisite that a published configuration must exist. There is no explicit when-to-use/when-not guidance nor any naming of create_quote, clone_quote, or update_quote_from_configuration as alternatives, leaving the choice to inference.

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

Deploy Server