AlpineLead OI

Estimate AlpineLead Sales Agent mission

estimate_sales_mission

Read-onlyIdempotent

Free preflight. Use before run_sales_mission to see planned maximum credit exposure and the work AlpineLead can complete inside the budget.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`goal`	Yes	Natural-language sales objective, for example: Find 3 Austrian machine builders with recruiting need.
`tone`	No		professional
`count`	No
`region`	No	Optional region.
`country`	No	Austria, Germany, Switzerland or DACH.	DACH
`district`	No	Optional district.
`industry`	No	Optional target industry.
`language`	No		en
`max_budget`	No	Maximum AlpineLead credits the mission may consume.
`destination`	No	Planned result destination: alpinelead, webhook, pipedrive, hubspot, both, or all.	alpinelead
`minimum_score`	No
`sales_kit_count`	No
`include_sales_kits`	No

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

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

Changed1 schema field changedSep 2, 2026
- changedInput schema / properties / language / default
```
Previous value: -"de"New value: +"en"
```

Changed1 schema field changedSep 1, 2026

changedInput schema / properties / destination / description

Previous value: -"Planned result destination: alpinelead, webhook, pipedrive, both, or all."New value: +"Planned result destination: alpinelead, webhook, pipedrive, hubspot, both, or all."

Changed1 schema field changedSep 1, 2026

changedInput schema / properties / destination / description

Previous value: -"Planned result destination: alpinelead, webhook, or both."New value: +"Planned result destination: alpinelead, webhook, pipedrive, both, or all."

Changed1 schema field changedAug 31, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / destination

Added value: +{
+  "default": "alpinelead",
+  "description": "Planned result destination: alpinelead, webhook, or both.",
+  "title": "Destination",
+  "type": "string"
+}

AddedAug 30, 2026

TDQS

A4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already indicate readOnly, idempotent, and not open-world behavior. The description adds value by calling out the 'Free preflight' nature, the planned (non-executed) nature of the estimate, and its focus on budget exposure, going beyond the annotations without contradicting them.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence that immediately states the tool's status as a free preflight and its relationship to run_sales_mission. Every word contributes to the core purpose with no filler.

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

Completeness3/5

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

The output schema and annotations cover return values and safety semantics, so the description does not need to restate those. However, given the large parameter surface and incomplete schema coverage, the description could do more to clarify how the estimate is influenced by parameters like goal and max_budget. It is adequate but has clear gaps.

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?

Schema description coverage is only 54%, leaving several parameters undocumented in the schema, but the description does little to clarify them. It references budget and credit exposure, loosely mapping to max_budget, but it adds no meaning for parameters such as tone, count, language, minimum_score, or sales_kit_count.

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 identifies the tool as a free preflight for a sales mission, with the specific purpose of showing planned maximum credit exposure and the work accomplishable within budget. It explicitly distinguishes this from run_sales_mission, 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 Guidelines4/5

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

The description explicitly instructs to use this tool before run_sales_mission and explains the value it provides. It does not enumerate when not to use it or compare it with other siblings, but the primary alternative is named and the context is clear.

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

All AlpineLead OI tools Inspect

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

C2.4/5.0

Disambiguation2/5

Several tools overlap or duplicate: run_sales_mission intentionally duplicates check_sales_mission_status and get_sales_mission_result, and there are multiple capability/routing tools (get_capabilities, match_alpinelead_capability, get_alpinelead_recommendation_packet, recommend_next_tool) with similar purposes. Blank descriptions for several nexus_* tools make their boundaries even harder for an agent to determine.

Naming Consistency2/5

All names use snake_case, but there is no consistent verb_noun pattern. The set mixes prefixed families (agentpub_*, nexus_*, predictive_*_info), noun-only names (winning_pattern, learning_engine), reversed noun_verb names (radar_check, hunter_run), and get/check/run/status variants for closely related operations.

Tool Count1/5

56 tools is far beyond a well-scoped server surface. Many are one-off info, status, or diagnostic tools that could be consolidated into parameterized tools. This places an excessive routing burden on the agent and dilutes the core sales workflow.

Completeness3/5

The core lead-to-CRM workflow is fairly complete: discovery, analysis, qualification, sales kit generation, HubSpot push, and learning/feedback loops are covered. However, there are notable gaps such as no way to list or retrieve saved analyses, no explicit stop/cancel for Hunter or Sales Mission runs, and no update/cancel operations for Nexus tasks.

Resources

Need Help?