Skip to main content
Glama

pipedrive

by io.usefulapi

Search organizations

pipedrive_search_organizations
Read-only

Search organizations by term across selected fields. Pipedrive REST: GET /api/v2/organizations/search.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
termYesSearch term (at least 2 characters, required).
limitNoMax results to return (1–500, default 100).
cursorNoOpaque pagination cursor from a previous response's `next_cursor`.
fieldsNoComma-separated fields to search — any of 'address', 'custom_fields', 'name', 'notes'.
exact_matchNoIf true, only exact matches (case-insensitive) are returned.

Schema Changelog

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

  1. First observed

TDQS

B3.1/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the read-only nature is known. The description adds only the REST endpoint (GET /api/v2/organizations/search) which is not behavioral context. It does not disclose pagination behavior, response characteristics, or any other operational details.

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 two sentences long, immediately states the purpose, and includes the REST reference without any filler. Every word earns its place, making it highly concise and well-structured.

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 tool has full schema coverage and a read-only annotation, making it functional for simple invocation. However, there is no output schema and the description does not mention response format, pagination, or usage context, leaving some gaps for an agent trying to interpret results or compare with alternatives.

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

Parameters3/5

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

Schema coverage is 100% with all 5 parameters described. The description's phrase 'across selected fields' references the fields parameter but does not add new meaning beyond the schema. Baseline of 3 applies because the schema handles parameter documentation.

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 clearly states 'Search organizations by term across selected fields' with a specific verb (search) and resource (organizations). It distinguishes from sibling search tools like pipedrive_search_persons by naming the resource, though it doesn't explicitly contrast with pipedrive_search_items.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like pipedrive_list_organizations or pipedrive_search_items. There are no exclusions, prerequisites, or context about typical use cases beyond the basic search functionality.

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

All pipedrive 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

A3.7/5.0
Disambiguation5/5

Each tool targets a distinct resource and action, with clear separation between create, get, list, and search operations. The global search tool is explicitly differentiated from entity-specific searches, and pipelines/stages/current_user are unique. No two tools appear to serve the same purpose.

Naming Consistency4/5

Tool names follow a consistent verb_noun pattern (e.g., list_deals, get_person, create_activity), with the exception of 'add_note' using 'add' instead of 'create'. This is a minor deviation that does not cause confusion, but the inconsistency between add and create is noticeable.

Tool Count4/5

At 19 tools, the server covers a broad set of CRM entities and operations, which is reasonable for the scope. While it is on the heavier side, each tool serves a distinct function and none are redundant. The count feels justified for a comprehensive CRM integration.

Completeness2/5

The server lacks update and delete operations for all entities, and there is no create operation for organizations, pipelines, or stages. This creates significant gaps that would prevent agents from modifying existing records or creating certain entities. The read and search capabilities are solid, but the lifecycle coverage is severely incomplete.

Resources