Skip to main content
Glama

MisarReach MCP Server

by io.github.Misar-AI

sync_lead_list

Idempotent

Import a Hunter.io lead list into local lead records so the rest of these tools can work with it.

Run it after create_lead_list, or on any existing list from list_lead_lists, to pull its contacts in. Until a list is synced its contacts are invisible to list_leads, enrich_lead and send_to_campaign.

Writes local lead records. Re-syncing the same list refreshes rather than duplicating, so it is safe to repeat. Requires an API key and a connected Hunter.io account. Costs no credits; enrichment and verification are billed separately.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
listIdYesHunter.io list ID (integer as string)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4.9/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

The description adds valuable details beyond annotations: it states it 'Writes local lead records' (consistent with readOnlyHint=false), explains re-syncing 'refreshes rather than duplicating' (deepening idempotentHint), and reveals authentication and billing context (API key, no credits). This goes beyond the structured hints and is not contradictory.

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?

The description is four tight sentences: purpose, usage sequence, side effects, and prerequisites/cost. Each sentence contributes new information without redundancy, making it concise and well-structured.

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?

Despite a single parameter and no output schema, the description covers all necessary aspects: what it does, when to use it, what happens if you don't, prerequisites, idempotency, and cost behavior. This fully supports an agent in invoking the tool correctly.

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?

The schema already documents the sole parameter listId with type and format, so baseline is 3. The description adds semantic context by explaining that the list comes from create_lead_list or list_lead_lists, telling the agent where to source the value. This linkage exceeds the schema's simple type description.

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 verb 'Import' and the specific resource 'Hunter.io lead list' into 'local lead records'. It distinguishes itself from siblings such as create_lead_list (which creates a list) and list_lead_lists (which lists lists), making the tool's role unambiguous.

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?

Explicit usage guidance is provided: 'Run it after create_lead_list, or on any existing list from list_lead_lists' tells the agent when to invoke. It also explains the consequence of not syncing ('invisible to list_leads, enrich_lead and send_to_campaign') and prerequisite ('Requires an API key and connected Hunter.io account'), giving clear context for selection.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

All MisarReach MCP Server toolsInspect
Try in Browser
RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Disambiguation5/5

Every tool targets a distinct resource and action: deals, leads, lists, autopilot runs, sales agent config, channels, and discovery. Even where tools share an entity, they are clearly differentiated (e.g., list_deals vs get_pipeline, update_deal vs move_deal_stage), with descriptions explicitly calling out when to use which.

Naming Consistency5/5

All 27 tools follow a strict verb_noun snake_case pattern: create, get, list, update, move, search, score, sync, start, submit, verify, etc. No mixed conventions or vague verbs—each name precisely signals its function.

Tool Count3/5

27 tools is on the heavier side and slightly exceeds the typical well-scoped range. However, the server covers multiple subdomains (deals, lead discovery, autopilot, sales agent, channels), so the count is justified by the breadth of the domain, though it feels dense.

Completeness4/5

Core lifecycles are covered: deals (create, list, update, move), leads (search, sync, list, enrich, score, verify, send), autopilot (start, list, status), sales agent (config, actions, process), and channels (status, update). Minor gaps include no delete tool for deals/leads and no stop-autopilot, but these are likely intentional and not blocking.

Resources