Skip to main content
Glama
soil-dev

capsulemcp

list_party_entries

Read-only

Retrieve timeline entries (notes, emails, tasks) for a party, sorted newest first. For organizations, include linked persons to see full conversation history.

Instructions

List timeline entries (notes, captured emails, completed-task records) for a party. Returns entries newest-first. Each entry has a type ('note', 'email', 'task'), free-text content, and timestamps. Use this to read the conversation history with a contact or organisation — answers questions like 'what's the latest with X?' For opportunity or project timelines, use list_opportunity_entries or list_project_entries respectively. IMPORTANT for organisations: pass includeLinkedPersons: true to surface entries filed against the org's linked people (sales-conversation emails almost always land on a person row, not the org row — Capsule's API files each entry against exactly one party). Without this flag, an org with active customer-facing email will appear quiet here even though its lastContactedAt is current. For any 'what's new with $ORG?' query, set includeLinkedPersons: true.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
partyIdNo
pageNo
perPageNo
embedNoComma-separated embeds, e.g. 'attachments,participants'
includeLinkedPersonsNoWhen true AND `partyId` is an ORGANISATION, also include entries filed against the organisation's linked people (the persons whose `organisation` field references this org). The connector enumerates linked persons via `GET /parties/{orgId}/people`, fans out `GET /parties/{personId}/entries` in parallel (concurrency-capped, default 5 / configurable via `CAPSULE_MCP_BATCH_CONCURRENCY`), and merges into a single feed sorted by `entryAt` descending, deduped by entry id. Default is `false` — single GET, existing behaviour unchanged. WHY THIS FLAG EXISTS: Capsule's API files each entry against exactly one party row (verified v1.6.6 wire-trace probe 4 — POST /entries rejects multi-party bodies with 422 'entry must be linked to either a party, opportunity or kase'). For an organisation with multiple contacts, captured emails almost always land on a person row, not the org. As a result, `list_party_entries(orgId)` with `includeLinkedPersons: false` will miss recent customer-facing email — even though the org's own `lastContactedAt` is updated by the activity. This flag is the correct call for any 'what's new with $ORG?' question. WHEN `partyId` IS A PERSON: silently no-op — persons have no linked-people relationship in Capsule's data model, so the flag is functionally inert (the connector still issues a cheap `/people` check; the response is empty). LATENCY: 1 + N round trips for an org with N linked people, concurrency-capped (typical: 2-3 waves for N=10). Linked-person enumeration reads the first 100 linked people; use list_employees for explicit pagination when an organisation has more contacts than that. Use `includeLinkedPersons: false` for fast pre-screen reads where you only need the org-row entries (e.g. invoice/contract notes that are typically filed at the org level). PAGINATION CAVEAT: `page` and `perPage` apply to the MERGED window, and the merge has a hard ceiling — it reliably orders only the most-recent ~100 entries across the org + its people (each party is fetched at Capsule's per-party cap of 100, and a top-100-per-party merge is correct only up to global position 100). Windows that cross the ceiling are truncated to the entries still inside that top-100 set; windows starting beyond it return no entries and end the feed. It does NOT continue into older history. To read a specific contact's full timeline beyond the merged ceiling, call `list_party_entries` on that person's id directly (the default single-GET path paginates natively with no ceiling). For the LLM-driven 'what's the latest with $ORG' query this is the typical use of, the first page is exact and the ceiling is never reached.
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false. The description adds rich behavioral context: returns entries newest-first, each with type/content/timestamps, explains the includeLinkedPersons flag's mechanism (enumerating linked people, fanning out requests, merging with dedup), latency implications, pagination caveats, and limitations. No contradiction with annotations.

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 lengthy but well-structured with clear sections (e.g., 'IMPORTANT', 'WHY THIS FLAG EXISTS', 'LATENCY', 'PAGINATION CAVEAT'). Important information is front-loaded. While every sentence serves a purpose, minor redundancy could be trimmed; overall it balances thoroughness with readability.

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?

Given the tool's complexity (5 parameters, critical flag, no output schema), the description covers all necessary aspects: purpose, usage, parameter semantics for the key flag, behavioral details, limitations, latency, pagination, and alternatives. It provides complete guidance for correct invocation.

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 description coverage is low (40%), but the description compensates with extensive detail for the key parameter includeLinkedPersons, explaining its purpose, behavior, and caveats. However, other parameters like partyId, page, perPage, and embed lack elaboration beyond what the schema provides, though they are standard and less complex.

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 lists timeline entries (notes, emails, tasks) for a party, returning them newest-first. It explicitly differentiates from siblings list_opportunity_entries and list_project_entries by mentioning their respective uses for opportunity or project timelines.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

The description provides explicit guidance on when to use this tool: 'Use this to read the conversation history with a contact or organisation'. It also specifies when to use alternative tools ('For opportunity or project timelines, use list_opportunity_entries or list_project_entries'). The detailed explanation of the includeLinkedPersons flag and its scenario ('For any 'what's new with $ORG?' query, set `includeLinkedPersons: true`') further enhances usage clarity.

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/soil-dev/capsulemcp'

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