Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
rd-station-crm

rd-station-crm

by juliano09
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

rdstation_get_contact

Fetch a contact's data from RD Station CRM by providing its ID, returning the full contact record.

Instructions

Get a single contact from RD Station CRM by id.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "contact_id": "<contact_id>"
    },
    "name": "rdstation_get_contact"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
contact_idYesRD Station contact id

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the disclosure burden. 'Get' and 'single' imply a read-only lookup, but the description does not mention response shape, not-found/error behavior, or side effects. This is minimal but not misleading.

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?

One compact, front-loaded sentence with no filler. Every word contributes to the action, resource, and lookup key.

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

Completeness4/5

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

For a single-parameter read operation, this is essentially complete: it names the action, resource, and required input. It could add response or error expectations, but complexity is low and no output schema exists.

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?

The schema describes the only parameter (contact_id) with 100% coverage, so the baseline is 3. The description adds no format or additional semantic detail beyond what the schema already provides.

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?

States the verb 'Get', the resource 'single contact', and the lookup mechanism 'by id'. This clearly distinguishes it from rdstation_list_contacts (collection) and from create/update/delete mutations.

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 gives clear context: use this when you have a specific contact_id and need a single record. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, so it stops short of a 5.

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