Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
agenthouse-org

dealdesk-mcp

by agenthouse-org
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Hybrid

dealdesk.get_quote

Retrieve quote status, totals, acceptance summary, analytics, and customer share links by quote ID to review or share DealDesk quotes.

Instructions

Get quote status, totals, acceptance summary, analytics, and customer share links (classic + rich/experience paths).

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
quoteIdYes
projectIdNoDealDesk project id. Omit when the OAuth token or API key authorizes exactly one project. Required when Connect authorized several projects.

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
quoteYesQuote status, totals, and optional analytics/shares. Extra fields live on this object, not beside it.
idempotentReplayNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed4 schema fields changedv0.1.1
    • 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",
-  "quoteId"
-]New value: +[
+  "quoteId"
+]
    • 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."
  2. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

C2.8/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. 'Get' implies a non-mutating read, but nothing is said about authentication/authorization requirements, whether response shape varies by the classic vs rich/experience path, quota limits, or what the share links actually are. The path distinction is mentioned but never characterized.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler. The trailing parenthetical is slightly cryptic and would have been better spent on routing guidance, but the sentence is efficient.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be respecified — yet the description spends its words enumerating them anyway. Given a crowded quote-tool namespace and no annotations, the description leaves the key gaps (when to choose this over get_quote_summary, and the meaning of quoteId) 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 description coverage is only 50%: projectId is well documented in the schema, but quoteId has no description anywhere, and the description adds no parameter meaning at all. A GET-by-id tool should at minimum clarify that quoteId is the canonical identifier, especially given multiple sibling id conventions (card, company, contact, case).

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?

Specific verb 'Get' + resource 'quote' with an enumeration of the payload (status, totals, acceptance summary, analytics, share links). It is distinguishable from write siblings like patch_quote or create_quote, but it does not differentiate itself from near-neighbors such as get_quote_summary, render_quote_totals, or list_quote_shares, which appear to return overlapping data.

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?

No statement of when to use this tool versus the many quote siblings (get_quote_summary, list_quotes, list_quote_shares, render_quote_totals). The agent must infer usage from the name alone, and the '(classic + rich/experience paths)' parenthetical is never explained as a selection criterion.

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