Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Clay.com MCP Server

Clay.com MCP Server

by bpw-civic
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

clay_query_table

Retrieve specific data from Clay tables by applying filters and sorting to query the table.

Instructions

Query a Clay table with optional filters and sorting. Use this to retrieve specific data from your Clay tables.

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": {
      "tableId": "<tableId>"
    },
    "name": "clay_query_table"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
tableIdYesThe ID of the table to query
filtersNoFilter conditions as key-value pairs (e.g., {"status": "active"})
sortNo
limitNoMaximum number of results (default 50, max 100)
offsetNoNumber of rows to skip (for pagination)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

A3.5/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must cover behavioral traits. It only states the basic operation without disclosing side effects, permissions, or edge cases like non-existent tables. The description is insufficient to fully inform an agent.

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 short and front-loaded, but the second sentence is slightly redundant. It could be more compact without loss of meaning.

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?

The tool has no output schema and moderate complexity (5 params, nested objects). The description does not mention return format, pagination behavior, or error handling, leaving significant gaps for an agent.

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?

The input schema already describes most parameters (80% coverage). The description adds no extra meaning beyond mentioning optional filters and sorting, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 verb 'Query' and the resource 'Clay table', distinguishing it from sibling tools like clay_get_table_schema and clay_search_* which target different operations.

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?

The description explicitly says to use this tool to 'retrieve specific data from your Clay tables', providing clear context. Although alternatives are not directly mentioned, sibling tool names imply when other tools would be more appropriate.

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