Skip to main content
Glama
gca-global

Qobrix CRM MCP Server

by gca-global

qobrix_get_opportunity

Retrieve a single lead or opportunity by UUID to drill into pipeline deal details, including contact, properties, and assigned agent.

Instructions

Get a single lead/opportunity by UUID — drill into a pipeline deal in the Sales Pipeline workflow. Returns { data: { id, ref, status, enquiry_type, contact_name, agent, ... } }. RESO mapping: status 'new' = Lead, 'open' = Active/SQL, 'won' = Closed Won, 'closed_lost' = Lost. Verified include: ContactNameContacts (the person), Properties (linked listings), AgentAgents (assigned broker, RESO ListAgent), PropertyTypes, ClosedLostReason, User, OwnerUsers. Canonical deal drill-down pattern: 1. Get the lead with include=['ContactNameContacts','Properties','AgentAgents'] 2. Check showing history: qobrix_list_viewings (search by related property) 3. Check offers: qobrix_search_offers for this lead 4. Check activity: search Tasks, Calls, Meetings linked to this opportunity FK: contact_name → Contacts, agent → Agents, owner → Users.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYesOpportunity/Lead UUID
includeNoAssociations to expand. Verified options: ContactNameContacts (contact details), Properties (linked properties), AgentAgents (assigned agent), PropertyTypes, ClosedLostReason, User, OwnerUsers
Behavior5/5

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

With no annotations, the description fully handles transparency. It discloses the return structure, RESO status mapping, verified include options, and FK relationships. This goes well beyond a simple 'get by ID' and gives the agent deep insight into tool behavior.

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 long but well-structured: core purpose, return shape, mapping, include options, and workflow. Every sentence contributes value, and the front-loaded first sentence states the main action. A slight deduction for density, but it remains focused.

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?

For a single-getter with no output schema, the description is remarkably complete. It covers the return value shape, status semantics, include behavior, and integration with the broader workflow. This fully compensates for the missing output schema and meets the needs of an agent selecting and invoking the tool.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters5/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Although schema coverage is 100%, the description adds significant meaning to the 'include' parameter by listing verified options and recommending a canonical include pattern. It also explains the meaning of 'id' as UUID and provides contextual mapping for status values, enriching 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 identifies the tool as a single-record getter ('Get a single lead/opportunity by UUID') and distinguishes it from list/search siblings by focusing on individual deal drill-down. It also names the resource type explicitly, making its purpose unambiguous.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Provides explicit context on when to use this tool: to drill into a pipeline deal as part of a canonical workflow. It names alternative/complementary tools (qobrix_list_viewings, qobrix_search_offers) and gives a step-by-step pattern, which is exemplary usage 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/gca-global/qobrix-crm-mcp'

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