Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
agenthouse-org

dealdesk-mcp

by agenthouse-org
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Hybrid

dealdesk.render_card_summary

Render the DealDesk card-summary widget in ChatGPT or other MCP Apps hosts when users need visual card details instead of raw JSON.

Instructions

Show the DealDesk card-summary widget in MCP Apps hosts (ChatGPT). Call this when the user should see the card UI. Data tools like get_card return JSON only.

Input Schema

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

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
cardYesDesk card. Null owner/account fields are omitted so hosts that cached an older object-only schema still accept the payload.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed5 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",
-  "cardId"
-]New value: +[
+  "cardId"
+]
    • changedOutput schema / additionalProperties
      Previous value: -falseNew value: +true
    • changedOutput schema / properties / card / description
      Previous value: -"Desk card shown in the card-summary widget"New value: +"Desk card. Null owner/account fields are omitted so hosts that cached an older object-only schema still accept the payload."
    • removedOutput schema / properties / card / properties
      Removed value: -{
-  "accountRef": {
-    "additionalProperties": true,
-    "type": "object"
-  },
-  "attributes": {
-    "additionalProperties": true,
-    "type": "object"
-  },
-  "cardId": {
-    "type": "string"
-  },
-  "contactRef": {
-    "additionalProperties": true,
-    "type": "object"
-  },
-  "description": {
-    "type": "string"
-  },
-  "deskDescription": {
-    "type": "string"
-  },
-  "notes": {
-    "type": "array"
-  },
-  "ownerDeskUser": {
-    "additionalProperties": true,
-    "type": "object"
-  },
-  "ownerRef": {
-    "additionalProperties": true,
-    "type": "object"
-  },
-  "priority": {
-    "type": "string"
-  },
-  "stage": {
-    "type": "string"
-  },
-  "title": {
-    "type": "string"
-  }
-}
  2. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A3.9/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does disclose an important trait: it only renders in MCP Apps hosts (ChatGPT), implying environment dependency. However, it omits permissions needed, whether it mutates anything, and behavior in hosts that don't support widgets.

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

Conciseness5/5

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

Three short sentences, front-loaded with the action and the routing rule. No filler; every sentence carries a distinct fact.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained, and the description covers the key host constraint and sibling routing. It is nearly complete for this tool, missing only parameter-level and host-failure guidance.

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 50%, and the description says nothing about cardId or projectId. The undocumented cardId is required, so the description fails to compensate for the coverage gap, leaving projectId's auth-conditional behavior documented only in the schema.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: show the DealDesk card-summary widget. It also explicitly distinguishes itself from the sibling get_card, noting that data tools return JSON only, so an agent can route correctly without opening schemas.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Gives a clear condition: 'Call this when the user should see the card UI,' and contrasts it with data-returning tools like get_card. It lacks explicit when-not guidance (e.g., non-UI hosts where it can't render), but the use context is unambiguous.

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