Skip to main content
Glama

deals_list_permitted_users

List users permitted to view or edit a deal based on its visibility settings. Useful for access control auditing.

Instructions

List permitted users for a deal.

Returns the list of users who have access to view and edit a specific deal based on its visibility settings.

Workflow tips:

  • Shows which users can access the deal

  • Depends on deal's visibility settings (private, shared, etc.)

  • Includes user details and permission levels

  • Useful for access control auditing

  • Cached for 5 minutes

Common use cases:

  • Check deal access: { "id": 123 }

  • Audit who can see a sensitive deal

  • Verify team member access

  • Review sharing permissions

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYesID of the deal
Behavior4/5

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

Since no annotations are provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses caching (5 minutes), dependency on deal visibility settings, and notes that it returns user details and permission levels. This adds value beyond 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.

Conciseness5/5

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

The description is well-structured with sections for purpose, workflow tips, and common use cases. It is concise, front-loaded, and every sentence adds value.

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?

Given the low complexity (one parameter, no output schema, no annotations), the description is complete: it covers purpose, usage, behavior, and caching. Nothing essential is missing.

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?

There is only one parameter (id) with full schema description coverage (100%). The description does not add additional meaning beyond the schema, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 'List permitted users for a deal' and elaborates on what it returns. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools by being specific to deals and user permissions.

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 provides workflow tips and common use cases, such as checking deal access and auditing access. It gives good context but does not explicitly state when not to use or mention alternatives.

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/iamsamuelfraga/mcp-pipedrive'

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