Skip to main content
Glama

Mob (Demo)

by io.github.benkaiser

contact_method_manage

Add, update, or remove a contact method (email, phone, social handle, etc.)

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idNoThe contact method ID (required for "update" and "remove")
typeNoType of contact method (required for "add"). Built-ins: email, phone, whatsapp, telegram, signal, twitter, instagram, facebook, linkedin, website, other. Custom values defined in Settings are also accepted.
labelNoLabel (e.g. "Personal", "Work")
valueNoThe value - email, phone number, handle (required for "add")
actionYesAction to perform
contact_idNoThe contact ID (required for "add")
is_primaryNoSet as primary for this type

Schema Changelog

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

  1. First observed

TDQS

A3.5/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It merely states the actions without disclosing side effects, the need for IDs, validation behavior, or whether removal is hard/soft. This is a mutation tool and the description does not communicate any of these behavioral traits.

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 efficiently conveys the tool's purpose with no redundant words.

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 schema covers parameter semantics, but the description lacks guidance about action-specific requirements and preconditions. With no output schema and no annotations, the description does not fully equip an agent to handle the tool's conditional logic (e.g., id required for update/remove). It is minimally adequate but leaves gaps.

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?

The schema has 100% description coverage for all 7 parameters, so the schema already provides the parameter meanings. The description adds nothing beyond repeating type examples (email, phone, social handle) which are already in the 'type' property description. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 exact operations ('Add, update, or remove') and the resource ('contact method'), with illustrative types. This distinguishes it from sibling contact tools like contact_update/contact_create, which operate on the contact record itself, not contact methods.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

Usage is implied: to manage contact methods. However, there is no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor any exclusions or prerequisites. The description does not mention that 'add' requires contact_id or that 'update'/'remove' require id, though these are in the schema.

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

All Mob (Demo) 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

B3.4/5.0
Disambiguation4/5

Most tools are clearly distinct by entity, but contact_get and contact_timeline overlap significantly, and debt_manage's action='list' duplicates what other entities do with a dedicated list tool. Descriptions are detailed enough to resolve most ambiguity, though.

Naming Consistency3/5

Tool names are mostly snake_case and readable, but they mix conventions: noun_verb (contact_create), verb_noun (batch_create_activities), and descriptive phrases (contacts_needing_attention). The noun_manage pattern is dominant, but the lack of uniformity makes the naming less predictable.

Tool Count2/5

With 42 tools, the surface is very large, even for a full-featured CRM. Many tools bundle multiple actions, but the sheer number forces an agent to consider many options, increasing selection difficulty and cognitive load.

Completeness5/5

The server provides comprehensive CRM coverage: contacts, activities, notes, tasks, reminders, gifts, debts, relationships, tags, custom fields, notifications, settings, and exports. It supports batch operations, duplicate detection, merge, and special queries, leaving few if any obvious gaps.

Resources