Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Pipedrive MCP Server

Pipedrive MCP Server

by ckalima
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

pipedrive_search_projects

Read-onlyIdempotent

Search Pipedrive projects by title to locate specific projects. Supports pagination and exact match for precise results.

Instructions

Search for projects in Pipedrive by title. (Requires the Projects add-on; Projects API is in public beta.)

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": {
      "term": "<term>"
    },
    "name": "pipedrive_search_projects"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
termYesSearch term (required)
limitNoNumber of results (1-100, default 50)
cursorNoCursor for pagination
exact_matchNoUse exact match instead of fuzzy search

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv2.4.0

TDQS

A4.1/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already indicate a safe, read-only operation. The description adds that it searches only by title and requires a specific add-on, which are useful behavioral constraints beyond annotations.

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?

The description is a single sentence with a parenthetical note, extremely concise and front-loaded with the core action.

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?

Given the absence of an output schema, the description does not clarify the return format or pagination behavior. Annotations cover safety, but the description could be more helpful by mentioning result structure.

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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so parameters are already documented. The description adds 'by title' which aligns with the 'term' parameter but doesn't provide new semantic detail beyond 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?

The description clearly states it searches for projects by title, using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling search tools like pipedrive_search_deals and pipedrive_search_leads.

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 mentions the requirement of the Projects add-on and beta status, providing important context for when the tool can be used. It does not explicitly exclude alternatives, but the resource-specific name makes usage clear.

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