Skip to main content
Glama

search_people

Find Copper CRM contacts by name, email, or phone number to retrieve person records with IDs for activity creation.

Instructions

Search Copper contacts by name, email, or phone. Returns matching person records with IDs for use in create_activity.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameNoFull name or partial name to search
emailsNoEmail addresses to match
phone_numberNoPhone number to match
page_sizeNoResults per page (default 20, max 200)
page_numberNoPage number (default 1)

Implementation Reference

  • The handler function for the search_people tool, which constructs the request body for the /people/search endpoint and formats the results.
      async ({ name, emails, phone_number, page_size, page_number }) => {
        const body = {};
        if (name) body.name = name;
        if (emails) body.emails = emails;
        if (phone_number) body.phone_number = phone_number;
        body.page_size = page_size || 20;
        body.page_number = page_number || 1;
    
        const results = await copperFetch("/people/search", { method: "POST", body });
        const people = results.map((p) => ({
          id: p.id,
          name: p.name,
          first_name: p.first_name,
          last_name: p.last_name,
          emails: p.emails,
          phone_numbers: p.phone_numbers,
          company_id: p.company_id,
          company_name: p.company_name,
          title: p.title,
        }));
        return jsonResult(people);
      }
    );
  • server.js:81-113 (registration)
    The registration of the search_people tool using McpServer.
    server.tool(
      "search_people",
      "Search Copper contacts by name, email, or phone. Returns matching person records with IDs for use in create_activity.",
      {
        name: z.string().optional().describe("Full name or partial name to search"),
        emails: z.array(z.string()).optional().describe("Email addresses to match"),
        phone_number: z.string().optional().describe("Phone number to match"),
        page_size: z.number().optional().describe("Results per page (default 20, max 200)"),
        page_number: z.number().optional().describe("Page number (default 1)"),
      },
      async ({ name, emails, phone_number, page_size, page_number }) => {
        const body = {};
        if (name) body.name = name;
        if (emails) body.emails = emails;
        if (phone_number) body.phone_number = phone_number;
        body.page_size = page_size || 20;
        body.page_number = page_number || 1;
    
        const results = await copperFetch("/people/search", { method: "POST", body });
        const people = results.map((p) => ({
          id: p.id,
          name: p.name,
          first_name: p.first_name,
          last_name: p.last_name,
          emails: p.emails,
          phone_numbers: p.phone_numbers,
          company_id: p.company_id,
          company_name: p.company_name,
          title: p.title,
        }));
        return jsonResult(people);
      }
    );
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It mentions the search functionality and return format (person records with IDs), but doesn't describe pagination behavior (implied by page_size/page_number parameters), rate limits, authentication requirements, error conditions, or whether this is a read-only operation. The description adds minimal behavioral context beyond the basic function.

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 extremely concise - just one sentence that efficiently communicates the search scope, return format, and integration purpose. Every word earns its place with zero redundancy. The structure is front-loaded with the core functionality.

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?

For a search tool with 5 parameters, 100% schema coverage, but no annotations and no output schema, the description is minimally adequate. It covers the basic purpose and integration hint but lacks behavioral details (pagination, errors, limits) and doesn't describe the return format beyond 'person records with IDs'. Given the complexity and missing structured data, it should provide more operational context.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents all 5 parameters thoroughly. The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what's in the schema descriptions. It mentions the searchable fields (name, email, phone) which aligns with parameter names but provides no extra context about how searches work (exact vs partial matching, case sensitivity, etc.).

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?

The description clearly states the tool's purpose: searching Copper contacts by specific fields (name, email, phone) and returning person records. It distinguishes from siblings like 'get_person' (singular retrieval) and 'search_companies' (different entity type). However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from 'list_activities' or 'list_opportunities' which are different resource types.

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 provides implied usage context by mentioning the returned IDs are 'for use in create_activity', suggesting integration with that specific sibling tool. However, it doesn't explicitly state when to use this versus alternatives like 'get_person' (for known IDs) or 'search_companies' (for different entity). No guidance on when NOT to use this tool is provided.

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/dazanza/copper-mcp'

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