Skip to main content
Glama

conduyt_create_batch_operation

Queues one bulk action (enroll, delete, tag, assign, set source, or set status) across many contacts, processed in the background with progress tracking and cancel support.

Instructions

Queue a Run Batch: ONE task applied to many contacts, logged with progress and cancel (no undo). Tasks: enroll (automationId of a published workflow), delete (the #73 engine: cleanup runs, contacts with an upcoming appointment are kept), add_tag / remove_tag (params.tagId), assign (params.userId — one rep) or a round-robin pool (params.userIds, 2–50 reps rotated in order; a rep who is no longer an active member is skipped), set_source (params.source — OVERWRITES the lead source), set_status (params.status — one of the account's lead statuses; a lead with a won deal keeps its status). Pick the contacts ONE way: contactIds (up to 50,000), filterPayload (universal filters), or filter + expectedTotal — the same filter you would give conduyt_list_contacts plus the meta.total it returned; the server re-counts and refuses with 409 expected_total_mismatch when the set moved, then freezes the matching ids (max 50,000). The run is processed in the background; poll conduyt_get_batch_operation. Requires the admin or owner role and an active subscription.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameYesA name for the run (shown on the Run Batch page)
filterNoThe contact list filter parameters, exactly as for conduyt_list_contacts; at least one non-empty value
paramsNoTask arguments: { tagId } | { userId } | { userIds: [...] } | { source } | { status }; none for enroll and delete
commentNoWhy this run (stored with it)
operationYesThe task
contactIdsNoExplicit contacts
automationIdNoenroll only: the published workflow
expectedTotalNoWith filter: the total the list showed for it (meta.total)
filterPayloadNoUniversal filter rules (the Smart View filter shape)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv4.71.0

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full behavioral burden and does so richly: no undo, background processing with progress and cancel, admin/owner role and active subscription requirements, 409 expected_total_mismatch on moved sets, id freezing, and task-specific side effects like source overwrite and skipping inactive reps. This is unusually complete for a destructive batch operation.

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 dense but front-loaded and every clause carries useful information. The long parenthetical task mapping is efficient but makes it harder to scan than a short structured list would be.

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?

For a 9-parameter asynchronous batch tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description covers the critical context: task semantics, contact selection modes, limits, polling, authorization, and a specific error condition. Nothing essential for correct invocation appears missing.

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

Parameters5/5

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

Schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline would be 3, but the description adds substantial meaning beyond the schema: it maps each operation to its params, explains round-robin userIds constraints and inactive-rep skipping, clarifies set_source overwrites and set_status preserves won-deal status, and defines expectedTotal against meta.total from conduyt_list_contacts. This materially improves invocation correctness.

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

Purpose4/5

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

The description states a specific verb and resource ('Queue a Run Batch') and enumerates the exact tasks supported, so the tool's purpose is unmistakable. It does not explicitly differentiate itself from sibling bulk tools such as conduyt_bulk_tag_contacts or conduyt_bulk_edit_contacts, which keeps it from a 5.

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?

It gives clear operational guidance: choose contacts via contactIds, filterPayload, or filter+expectedTotal, and poll conduyt_get_batch_operation because the run is backgrounded. It also names required roles and subscription. However, it does not explicitly say when to use this tool rather than a sibling bulk operation.

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