Skip to main content
Glama
gray-wilbee

fub-mcp

by gray-wilbee
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

create_deal

Add a deal to Follow Up Boss CRM with stage, price, closing dates, and commission splits. Optionally attach people, users, and custom fields.

Instructions

Add a deal. (POST /deals)

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameYesName of the deal.
priceNoThe price associated with this deal.
stageIdYesThe stage that this deal should be assigned to.
userIdsNoA list of user ids that should be part of this deal.
extraBodyNoExtra raw JSON body fields not explicitly listed above — e.g. custom.* fields when creating/updating people or deals. Keys and values are sent as-is.
peopleIdsNoA list of person ids that should be part of this deal.
extraQueryNoExtra raw query parameters not explicitly listed above — e.g. FUB custom field filters like custom.ClosingDate on /people or /deals. Keys and values are sent as-is.
descriptionNoDescription of the deal.
orderWeightNoSet this value to enforce a specific sort order.
possessionDateNoPossession Date for this deal.
teamCommissionNoCommission split for the team split.
agentCommissionNoCommission split for the agent split.
commissionValueNoCommission value to assign to this deal.
dueDiligenceDateNoDue Diligence Date for this deal.
projectedCloseDateNoProjected close date of this deal.
earnestMoneyDueDateNoEarnest Money Due Date for this deal.
finalWalkThroughDateNoFinal Walk Through Date for this deal.
mutualAcceptanceDateNoMutual Acceptance Date for this deal.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

C2.1/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only says 'Add a deal', which implies a mutation, but does not disclose side effects, validation requirements, or what happens after creation. It fails to provide any behavioral context beyond the bare action.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness2/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is one short sentence, but this is under-specification rather than conciseness. It lacks any structure or front-loading of important information, and every word could be expanded to add value.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness1/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For an 18-parameter tool with no output schema and no annotations, this description is grossly incomplete. It does not explain what a deal is, what the required fields mean in context, any constraints, or what the response looks like. An agent has almost no context beyond the schema.

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 all 18 parameters are documented in the schema. The description adds nothing beyond the schema, which is the baseline for high coverage. It does not clarify parameter relationships or conditional requirements, but the schema already handles basic semantics.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose3/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description 'Add a deal' clearly states the verb and resource, and it is not a tautology since 'Add' implies creation. However, it is extremely minimal and does not differentiate from related tools like update_deal or get_deal, so it only partially satisfies the dimension.

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

Usage Guidelines1/5

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

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. Sibling tools like update_deal, list_deals, and get_deal exist, but the description provides no context about prerequisites, scenarios, or when not to use this tool.

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