Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
slidecold-mcp

slidecold-mcp

by slidecold
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

Export as lead

export_conversation_lead

Exports a conversation as an enriched lead using matching audience data and recent messages, optionally posts it to a webhook, and returns JSON or CSV.

Instructions

Export as lead. Required API key scope: conversations:write. POST /conversations/{id}/crm Builds a lead (enriched from the matching audience member, last 5 messages), fires the lead.imported webhook event, optionally POSTs the lead to webhookUrl (failures ignored), and returns it as JSON or CSV. The body is optional.

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": {
      "id": "<id>"
    },
    "name": "export_conversation_lead"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYesPath parameter `id`.
bodyNoJSON request body.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.2.0

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations only say readOnlyHint=false, idempotentHint=false, destructiveHint=false; the description adds the real behavior: a lead.imported webhook event is fired, an optional outbound POST to webhookUrl occurs with failures silently ignored, and enrichment pulls from the matching audience member plus the last 5 messages. Those side effects and the swallowed-error semantics are exactly the context annotations cannot convey.

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?

Front-loaded with the action, then scope, endpoint, behavior, and return format in a compact block. The repeated 'Export as lead.' opener duplicates the title and is the only clear waste.

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 tool with a nested body object and no output schema, the description covers return format, side effects, auth scope, and optionality of the body. Only the id parameter's provenance is left to the endpoint template, a minor gap.

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%, but the schema text is bare ('Path parameter `id`', 'JSON request body'), so the description carries real weight: it explains what webhookUrl does and that its failures are ignored, that format selects JSON or CSV output, and that body is optional. The id parameter's meaning is only implied via the POST path.

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 goes beyond the tautological title line: it states that the tool builds a lead from a conversation (enriched from the matching audience member and last 5 messages), posts to /conversations/{id}/crm, and returns JSON or CSV. That is a specific verb+resource and an agent can tell it apart from get_conversation or export_audience. It stops short of naming the sibling it replaces, so a 5 isn't warranted.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

It supplies a prerequisite (conversations:write scope) and notes the body is optional, which implies the minimal call shape. However, it never says when to choose this over get_conversation, export_audience, or update_conversation, and gives no when-not-to-use conditions.

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