Skip to main content
Glama

leads_update

Update properties of a lead in Pipedrive, including title, value, owner, or archive status. Only included fields are modified.

Instructions

Update an existing lead in Pipedrive.

Updates one or more properties of a lead. Only properties included in the request will be updated. Send null to unset a property (applicable for value, person_id, or organization_id).

Workflow tips:

  • Only include fields you want to update

  • Lead ID must be a UUID

  • Use null to clear optional fields

  • value must be an object with amount and currency

  • Leads inherit custom fields structure from deals

  • Set is_archived to true to archive a lead

Common use cases:

  • Update title: { "id": "", "title": "Updated Title" }

  • Update value: { "id": "", "value": { "amount": 10000, "currency": "USD" } }

  • Archive lead: { "id": "", "is_archived": true }

  • Clear person: { "id": "", "person_id": null }

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYesUUID of the lead to update (required)
titleNoLead title
owner_idNoID of the user who will own this lead
label_idsNoArray of label UUIDs
person_idNoID of the person associated with this lead (null to clear)
organization_idNoID of the organization associated with this lead (null to clear)
is_archivedNoWhether the lead is archived
valueNoLead value with amount and currency (null to clear)
expected_close_dateNoExpected close date in YYYY-MM-DD format
visible_toNoVisibility level
was_seenNoWhether the lead was seen
channelNoChannel ID
channel_idNoChannel identifier string
Behavior4/5

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

No annotations exist, so the description covers key behavioral traits: partial updates, null clearing, archive capability. It does not mention response format, error handling, or idempotency, but the core behaviors are well-documented.

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 well-structured with a brief overview, bulleted tips, and clear examples. It is concise yet informative, though slightly verbose in listing too many examples; still effective.

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?

Given 13 parameters and no output schema, the description covers the update behavior and provides examples. However, it lacks information on return value, error handling, and permissions, which would be needed for full completeness.

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

Parameters4/5

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

Schema coverage is 100%, setting baseline at 3. The description adds value by explaining partial update semantics, null clearing, and providing JSON examples for common fields, which goes beyond the schema descriptions.

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 the tool updates an existing lead, with specific verb and resource. It details partial update behavior and distinguishes from siblings like leads_create and leads_delete by focusing only on update functionality.

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 case examples, guiding the agent on proper usage (e.g., only include fields to update, use null to clear). It lacks explicit when-not-to-use or alternative tool references, but the context is clear.

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