Skip to main content
Glama
alludium

Affinity MCP Server

by alludium

List Opportunity Notes

affinity_list_opportunity_notes
Read-onlyIdempotent

Fetch all notes for a specific opportunity with creator info and timestamps to review deal progress or export documentation.

Instructions

List all notes attached to a specific opportunity in Affinity.

This is a V2 BETA endpoint - API may change.

Returns notes with HTML content, creator information, and timestamps.

Parameters:

  • opportunityId: Opportunity ID (required) - get from affinity_list_opportunities or affinity_get_opportunity

  • cursor: Pagination cursor from previous response

  • limit: Items per page (default 20, max 100)

Returns (JSON): { "notes": [ { "id": number, "content": { "html": string }, "creator": { "id": number, "firstName": string, "lastName": string, "primaryEmailAddress": string }, "createdAt": string, // ISO 8601 "type": "entities" | "interaction" } ], "count": number, "hasMore": boolean, "nextCursor": string | null }

Note Types:

  • "entities": Note attached directly to opportunity

  • "interaction": Note attached to a meeting or email about this opportunity

Use Cases:

  • View deal progress notes

  • Export opportunity documentation

  • Review fundraising lead history

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
opportunityIdYesOpportunity ID (numeric). Get from affinity_list_opportunities or affinity_get_opportunity.
cursorNoPagination cursor from previous response
limitNoItems per page (default 20, max 100)
responseFormatNoOutput format: "json" or "markdown". Default: "json"
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already indicate readOnly, non-destructive, idempotent behavior. The description adds important context: V2 BETA status, HTML content in notes, creator info, timestamps, and note types. No contradictions.

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?

Description is well-structured with sections for parameters, returns, note types, and use cases. It is somewhat lengthy but not wasteful. Front-loaded with the main action. Minor verbosity prevents a top score.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Since no output schema is provided, the description compensates fully with a detailed JSON response structure, note type explanations, pagination details, and use cases. Covers all necessary context for an agent to use the tool correctly.

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?

Input schema has 100% coverage with descriptions. The description repeats parameter info and adds sourcing context for opportunityId, but does not explain the responseFormat enum distinction. Baseline score of 3 is appropriate with minor extra value.

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 tool lists notes attached to a specific opportunity, differentiating it from similar note-listing tools for companies and persons. It uses specific verb-resource pairing and identifies the parent object.

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 explains where to get the opportunityId (from other tools) and lists use cases, but does not explicitly contrast with siblings like affinity_list_company_notes or affinity_list_person_notes. Some implicit differentiation but lacks explicit when-to-use guidance.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/alludium/affinity-mcp-server'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server