Skip to main content
Glama

fluentcrm_list_automations

Retrieve marketing automation funnels from FluentCRM to manage workflows, filter by search terms, and navigate through pages for campaign oversight.

Instructions

Pobiera automatyzacje (funnels)

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
pageNo
searchNo

Implementation Reference

  • Core handler function in FluentCRMClient that executes the tool logic: GET request to '/funnels' API endpoint with optional params (page, search).
    async listAutomations(params: any = {}) {
      const response = await this.apiClient.get('/funnels', { params });
      return response.data;
    }
  • Registration of the tool in the MCP server's tools list, including name, description, and input schema.
    {
      name: 'fluentcrm_list_automations',
      description: 'Pobiera automatyzacje (funnels)',
      inputSchema: {
        type: 'object',
        properties: {
          page: { type: 'number' },
          search: { type: 'string' },
        },
      },
    },
  • MCP server dispatch handler that calls the client.listAutomations method and formats the response.
    case 'fluentcrm_list_automations':
      return { content: [{ type: 'text', text: JSON.stringify(await client.listAutomations(args || {}), null, 2) }] };
  • Input schema definition for the tool: optional page (number) and search (string).
    inputSchema: {
      type: 'object',
      properties: {
        page: { type: 'number' },
        search: { type: 'string' },
      },
    },
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states the action ('retrieves') without detailing traits like whether it's read-only, paginated, rate-limited, or what the output format is. This leaves significant gaps in understanding how the tool behaves beyond its basic purpose.

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 very concise with a single phrase, making it front-loaded and efficient. However, it's under-specified rather than optimally concise, as it lacks necessary details for a tool with parameters and no annotations, slightly reducing its effectiveness.

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

Completeness2/5

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

Given the tool has 2 parameters with no schema descriptions, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain the parameters, behavioral traits, or return values, leaving the agent with insufficient information to use the tool correctly in a complex context.

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

Parameters2/5

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

The input schema has 2 parameters (page and search) with 0% description coverage, meaning they are undocumented. The description adds no information about these parameters, such as what 'page' refers to (e.g., pagination index) or what 'search' filters (e.g., by name or ID). It fails to compensate for the low schema coverage.

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 states the tool 'Pobiera automatyzacje (funnels)' which translates to 'Retrieves automations (funnels)' in English, providing a clear verb ('retrieves') and resource ('automations/funnels'). However, it doesn't distinguish this from sibling tools like 'fluentcrm_list_campaigns' or 'fluentcrm_list_contacts' beyond the resource type, making the purpose somewhat vague in context.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention any specific context, prerequisites, or exclusions, such as whether it's for listing all automations or filtered ones, or how it differs from other list tools in the sibling set.

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/netflyapp/fluentcrm-mcp-server'

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