Freshsales API by Freshworks

# Fix list: Freshsales API

From Anchor Terminal's listing at https://www.anchorterminal.com/tools/freshsales, the October 2026 research run, assessed 1 October 2026. Grade E, 40.8 out of 100.

This is everything the published grade says the listing lacks, the biggest possible gain to the total first. It comes from the reason given for each score, the checklist each category was scored against (https://www.anchorterminal.com/benchmark/#checklist), the provenance checks, the deductions, what we couldn't check and what the review panel asked for. A fix counts at the next check, once it's public.

For a coding agent working on Freshsales API: work through the items below in the product, its docs and its public pages. Each category gives the reason for its score, with the points each checklist item earned, and the checklist itself, so the gap is the items that earned less than their points. Change the product, not the wording, and keep a note of what you changed and where it's published.

## 1. Schema & documentation, 27 out of 100, up to 11.9 more on the total

Why it scored 27: No OpenAPI or other machine-readable spec found (0). No llms.txt or Markdown docs (0). One long HTML reference page with short endpoint descriptions and no when-not-to-use guidance (8 of 20). Field tables and filter bodies, with free-form filter JSON for views and search (8 of 15). curl examples throughout, an error format of `errors.code` and `errors.message` and a list of status codes (11 of 15). No version scheme or API changelog found (0).

The checklist (https://www.anchorterminal.com/benchmark/#checklist-schema):

APIs and MCP servers.

- 25, a machine-readable contract (a public OpenAPI file or similar; for MCP, typed JSON Schema inputs on every tool).
- 10, llms.txt or Markdown docs served for agents.
- 0 to 20, descriptions that say what a tool is for, when to use it and when not to, read from the tool definitions in the source or the API reference.
- 0 to 15, typed inputs with enums, constraints and required fields, and no free-form JSON blobs.
- 0 to 15, examples and documented error responses.
- 15, versioning and a public changelog.

Models are read from the API reference, the OpenAPI file, llms.txt, the structured-output and tool-use docs and the model cards. Frameworks from docs a model can follow, typed interfaces, examples and the API reference.

## 2. Reliability, 51 out of 100, up to 9.8 more on the total

Why it scored 51: Freshworks runs its own status page at status.freshworks.com across products and regions, but it renders only with JavaScript and its incidents API returned 403, so we couldn't see a Freshsales component (15 of 20). No readable incident history (5). 1,000 API requests an hour per account, published (15). 429 is documented, with no Retry-After or backoff guidance. Contact upsert and bulk upsert make creates safe to retry (6 of 15). No SLA found on the pricing page (0). The REST API is GA (10).

The checklist (https://www.anchorterminal.com/benchmark/#checklist-reliability):

Hosted APIs, MCP servers, models and platforms.

- 20, a public status page with component history (Statuspage, Instatus, BetterStack or the vendor's own).
- 0 to 30, the incident record for the last 90 days on that page. 30 for a clean record or trivial incidents only, 20 for minor incidents only, 10 for one major outage (an hour or more of a core API down, or errors across the board), 0 for several. 5 when there's no history we could read, and the note says so.
- 15, rate limits documented with numbers.
- 15, documented 429 or overload handling (Retry-After, backoff guidance), and idempotency keys or safe-retry guidance where writes are involved.
- 10, an SLA published for any paid tier.
- 10, the surface agents use is generally available, not beta or preview.

Local packages, SDKs, frameworks and stdio MCP servers.

- 20, installs from an official package with supported runtimes stated.
- 25, a public CI and test suite, passing on the default branch.
- 0 to 25, open crash or regression issues relative to activity (25 for few and handled, 0 for many, old and unanswered).
- 15, semver discipline and breaking changes called out in a changelog.
- 15, version 1.0 or later, or declared stable.

Protocols are read from their reference implementations, the public facilitators or servers, spec stability and test vectors.

## 3. Security & auth, 44 out of 100, up to 9.8 more on the total

Why it scored 44: One per-user API key in `Authorization: Token token=<key>`, limited by that user's role and visibility. No scopes, no OAuth for the CRM API, and we found no rotation docs (13 of 30). No read-only key. Access is whatever the user's role allows, and bulk delete endpoints exist (3 of 20). Records carry email, notes and chat text from outside parties, and we found no injection guidance (3 of 15). Audit logs listed on the Enterprise plan (8 of 15). HackerOne disclosure programme, a security.txt with contact and policy (no Expires field), and ISO, AICPA and Cyber Essentials Plus logos on the security page (17 of 20).

The checklist (https://www.anchorterminal.com/benchmark/#checklist-security):

- 0 to 30, the credential model. 30 for OAuth 2.1 with scopes, or scoped and revocable keys with rotation. 20 for plain revocable API keys. 10 for one all-powerful key. 10 off when a secret can travel in a URL query string as a documented option.
- 0 to 20, read-only or least-privilege modes, and confirmation or approval for destructive actions.
- 0 to 15, prompt-injection posture where the tool returns untrusted content (documented mitigations or guidance). A tool that returns no untrusted content gets 10.
- 0 to 15, audit logs or per-call visibility for the operator.
- 0 to 20, a security programme. security.txt or a disclosure policy, a bug bounty, SOC 2 or ISO 27001, advisories handled in public.

Models are read for retention, whether API data trains models (and whether that's off by default), zero-retention options and certifications. Frameworks for telemetry defaults, approval hooks, guardrails and sandboxing.

## 4. Payments & pricing, 30 out of 100, up to 8.8 more on the total

Why it scored 30: No x402, MPP or L402 (0). Plan prices public, Growth $9, Pro $39 and Enterprise $59 a user a month billed yearly, with Freddy AI Agent at $49 per 100 sessions, but nothing per API call (10). 21-day trial, and the pricing page says a card is needed only to continue after it (20). A person signs up in a browser and copies the key from profile settings (0).

The checklist (https://www.anchorterminal.com/benchmark/#checklist-payments):

The published rubric, also on the [x402 page](https://www.anchorterminal.com/x402/).

- 40, a machine payment protocol (x402, MPP or L402) on the tool's own endpoints. 10 to 30 when it covers only some endpoints or only goes through a third party, and the note says which.
- 20, per-call or per-unit pricing published without a login. 10 for public plan-only pricing, 0 for "contact sales" or prices behind a login.
- 20, a free tier or trial that doesn't need a card.
- 20, autonomous onboarding, meaning an agent can get access without a person signing up in a browser (keyless use, x402, a programmatic key API).

Payment platforms and agent wallets rarely charge for their own API over a machine protocol, so the first line has steps for them, and the highest one that applies counts. 40 when x402, MPP or L402 runs on all their own endpoints, 30 when it runs on part of their own API, 25 when their merchants can accept one, 20 for running a facilitator, 15 for paying as a buyer, and 0 when the only protocol is their own. Merchant acceptance sits above a facilitator because the platform's own customers can charge agents through it, while a facilitator settles for sellers who wire up the protocol themselves. The counter-argument (a facilitator does more for the protocol as a whole) has a point. Each note says which step applied.

Open-source software you run yourself is scored on its hosted or paid option if it has one. A free, self-hosted package with nothing to buy gets 20, 20 and 20 for the last three lines, and 0 to 40 for the first only if it ships a payment protocol.

## 5. Agent ergonomics, 48 out of 100, up to 8.5 more on the total

Why it scored 48: No MCP server for Freshsales. `include` embeds related records on request and lists default to 25 per page. No field selection to trim responses (10 of 25). `page` pagination, filtered views, search and filter endpoints (14 of 20). Errors carry a code and a message, with status codes documented (12 of 20). `/api/contacts/upsert` and `bulk_upsert` (100 records a request) give idempotent creates for contacts, but nothing similar for deals. `bulk_destroy` deletes in bulk (8 of 20). Every account has its own host, so an agent needs the bundle alias as well as the key, and there's no official SDK (4 of 15).

The checklist (https://www.anchorterminal.com/benchmark/#checklist-ergonomics):

- 0 to 25, context cost. For MCP, the number and size of the tool definitions (25 for ten or fewer compact tools, 15 for 11 to 30, 5 for more than 30, plus up to 10 back for toolsets, dynamic loading or read-only subsets). For APIs, whether responses can be sized (field selection, limits, summaries).
- 20, pagination, filtering and output-size controls.
- 20, actionable, documented error responses, codes and messages an agent can recover from.
- 20, idempotency or safe retries, and for MCP the `readOnlyHint` and `destructiveHint` annotations.
- 15, sensible defaults, few required parameters, and official SDKs in at least two languages.

Models are read for tool use, structured output, prompt caching, context length, batch and SDKs. Frameworks for how much code and how many defaults a tool-calling agent with MCP needs.

## 6. Maintenance & community, 5 out of 100, up to 8.3 more on the total

Why it scored 5: No public API changelog or release notes for the Freshsales API found, so no last change date (0). No dated entries in the last 90 days found (0). Freshworks runs community forums, but there's no API changelog to follow (5 of 15). No official Freshsales SDK. The FDK is for marketplace apps, not API calls (0). No packages to judge (0). Freshworks' MCP work, GA on 10 September 2026, covers Freshservice, not Freshsales.

The checklist (https://www.anchorterminal.com/benchmark/#checklist-maintenance):

- 0 to 30, time since the last release, or the last published model or API change for a closed service. 30 within 30 days, 20 within 90, 10 within 180, 0 older.
- 20, at least three releases or dated changelog entries in the last 90 days.
- 0 to 25, responsiveness. Issues and pull requests answered on GitHub (the open issues and how recent the replies are). For closed services, a public changelog and a support or community channel that answers, 0 to 15.
- 15, presence in the official MCP registry under a verified namespace (MCP servers), or current official SDKs (APIs and models).
- 10, package health, current dependencies and CI.

Models are read for deprecation notice periods and model churn rather than release counts.

## 7. Transparency & trust, 74 out of 100, up to 2.3 more on the total

Made of editorial 57, provenance 90.

Why it scored 74: Closed service with terms naming Freshworks Inc. (15). Privacy notice effective 1 March 2026 keeps service data up to six years from supply and other data up to three years from last contact, transfers under the Data Privacy Framework and SCCs, and links a subprocessor page and a data hosting page (24 of 30). No API deprecation policy or dated notices found (0). Subprocessors and hosting regions on their own pages (18 of 20).

The checklist (https://www.anchorterminal.com/benchmark/#checklist-transparency):

- 0 to 30, source availability and licence clarity. 30 for open source under an OSI licence, 15 for closed with clear terms, 0 for unclear terms.
- 0 to 30, data handling and retention statements that agree with each other (privacy policy, DPA, retention periods, subprocessors).
- 0 to 20, a deprecation policy or notices with dates.
- 0 to 20, telemetry disclosed with an opt-out (local software), or subprocessors and data locations disclosed (hosted).

The other half of Transparency and trust is the provenance score, computed from checked facts (below). The category score is the mean of the two.

Provenance checks not met in full (half of this category, computed from checked facts):

- Changelog: not found (0 of 10)

## What we couldn't check

What we couldn't read counted as absent. Publishing it on a page a plain HTTP fetch can read (not only in a browser) lets the next check count it.

- unchecked: Freshsales incident history, the status page needs JavaScript and its API returned 403
- unchecked: whether Freshworks publishes Freshsales API changes in product release notes we didn't find
- Whether the API key can be regenerated or revoked from profile settings, not stated in the reference

## Weaknesses

- No MCP server for Freshsales
- No OpenAPI, llms.txt or API changelog
- Per-user key with no scopes and no OAuth for the CRM API
- 1,000 requests an hour shared by the whole account
- Status history not readable without JavaScript

## What costs an agent a turn today

The notes we give agents before they call it. Each one is a workaround an agent shouldn't need.

- Build the base URL from the bundle alias shown under the API key, `https://<alias>.myfreshworks.com/crm/sales/api/`
- Use `/api/contacts/upsert` rather than create, so a retry updates instead of duplicating
- Budget calls, since 1,000 an hour covers the whole account and 429s carry no Retry-After
- Add `include=owner,sales_accounts` to pull related records in one call
- Expect to see only what the key owner's role can see

## What the review panel asked for

- publish an OpenAPI file
- add an API changelog
- read-only API keys
- CRM API OAuth

## When it's done

Send what changed and where it's published as a dispute (https://www.anchorterminal.com/builders/#disputes, or `POST https://www.anchorterminal.com/api/v1/contact` with `"kind": "dispute"`). Disputes are answered in public, and the listing is checked again by the same checklist. Paying for an audit or a listing claim changes nothing here.