Skip to main content
Glama
comma-compliance

pipedrive-mcp

by comma-compliance
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussions(1)Admin
TypeScript
Remote

pipedrive_deals_update

Update an existing Pipedrive deal by ID, including custom fields by name or key and native labels, to keep CRM records accurate.

Instructions

Update an existing deal. Supports custom fields by name or key, and the native Label field via label_ids (IDs or label names).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
titleNo
valueNo
org_idNo
statusNo
deal_idYesThe deal ID to update
currencyNo
stage_idNo
label_idsNoNative Label field. Label option IDs or label names (e.g. [367] or ['Test / Internal']). Replaces existing labels; pass [] to clear. Sent as top-level label_ids, not a custom field.
person_idNo
visible_toNoVisibility: 1=owner only, 3=owner's group, 5=owner's group+sub, 7=everyone
pipeline_idNo
custom_fieldsNoCustom fields by API key (e.g. { 'abc123hash': 'value' })
expected_close_dateNo
custom_fields_by_nameNoCustom fields by human-readable name (e.g. { 'Tier': 'Enterprise' })

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed4 schema fields changedv1.1.1
    • addedInput schema / properties / custom_fields / description
      Added value: +"Custom fields by API key (e.g. { 'abc123hash': 'value' })"
    • addedInput schema / properties / custom_fields_by_name / description
      Added value: +"Custom fields by human-readable name (e.g. { 'Tier': 'Enterprise' })"
    • addedInput schema / properties / label_ids
      Added value: +{
+  "anyOf": [
+    {
+      "items": {
+        "anyOf": [
+          {
+            "type": "integer"
+          },
+          {
+            "type": "string"
+          }
+        ]
+      },
+      "type": "array"
+    },
+    {
+      "type": "integer"
+    },
+    {
+      "type": "string"
+    }
+  ],
+  "description": "Native Label field. Label option IDs or label names (e.g. [367] or ['Test / Internal']). Replaces existing labels; pass [] to clear. Sent as top-level label_ids, not a custom field."
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / visible_to / description
      Added value: +"Visibility: 1=owner only, 3=owner's group, 5=owner's group+sub, 7=everyone"
  2. First observedv1.1.0

TDQS

C2.7/5.0
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 behavioral burden. It implies a mutation but says nothing about permission/ownership requirements, whether this is a partial update, how omitted fields are treated, or reversibility. The one behavioral detail (label_ids replaces existing labels) is already stated in the schema.

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?

Two tight sentences with the core purpose front-loaded and no filler. Nothing wasted, though it is arguably too terse for the tool's complexity.

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?

For a 14-parameter mutation tool with no annotations, no output schema, and 36% param coverage, the description is far too thin. It omits update semantics, permission expectations, and error/partial-failure behavior an agent would need to call it correctly.

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 low (36%) across 14 parameters, so the description should compensate. It only addresses custom fields and the label field, leaving title, value, status, stage_id, pipeline_id, person_id, org_id, currency, and expected_close_date undocumented in both schema and description.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Update an existing deal'), which cleanly separates it from pipedrive_deals_create, pipedrive_deals_delete, and pipedrive_deals_move_stage. It does not explicitly name any sibling, but the CRUD verb makes the distinction inferable.

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 when-to-use guidance, no alternatives named, and no prerequisites (e.g., when to prefer deals_move_stage over stage_id here). It only restates the capability, leaving the agent to infer context.

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