Skip to main content
Glama

list_contacts

Read-only

List and search contacts in the application, paginated, newest first. Read-only. Filters combine as AND; search matches name, username, email, phone, and platformId. Returns compact contact summaries without variable values — use get_contact for one contact's variables. Remember platformId is unique only per bot, so the same person talking to two bots appears as two contacts.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
pageNo1-based page number. Defaults to 1.
botIdNoOnly contacts belonging to this bot. Omit for all bots in the application.
limitNoContacts per page, between 1 and 100. Defaults to 20.
searchNoCase-insensitive substring matched against first/last name, username, email, phone, and platformId. Omit to list without searching.
statusNoOnly contacts with this subscription status ("subscribed" or "unsubscribed"). Omit for both.
isActiveNoTrue for active contacts only, false for deactivated only. Omit for both.
applicationIdNoApplication (workspace) id. Optional: an application-scoped key (app_...) defaults to its own application, but a personal key (usr_...) has no default and omitting it fails with MCP_APPLICATION_REQUIRED. Call list_applications to get the id.

TDQS

A4.9/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

The description adds substantial behavioral context beyond the readOnlyHint annotation, including pagination order (newest first), filter semantics (AND combination), search field scope, return content (compact summaries without variables), and a platformId uniqueness caveat. This is detailed and useful, with no contradiction to annotations.

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 compact and information-dense, with the main purpose stated first, followed by filter behavior, return type, and a caveat. Every sentence contributes meaningful context without redundancy or fluff.

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?

Given the tool's complexity (7 parameters) and absence of an output schema, the description covers essential aspects: pagination, sorting, filter combination, search breadth, return summary nature, and an important data-model caveat (platformId uniqueness per bot). It fully enables correct invocation and result interpretation.

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?

Input schema covers all 7 parameters with descriptions, so baseline is 3. The description adds value by explaining that filters combine as AND and that search matches name, username, email, phone, and platformId—this cross-parameter behavior is not fully captured in individual schema descriptions. However, much of the search field list is repeated from the schema, so it is not maximally additive.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'List and search contacts in the application, paginated, newest first.' This clearly states what the tool does and differentiates it from the sibling tool get_contact by noting it returns summaries without variables. The scope and sorting behavior are explicit.

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?

The description provides explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus an alternative: 'use get_contact for one contact's variables.' It also clarifies that filters combine as AND, which is a usage rule that helps the agent decide how to construct queries. This goes beyond simply stating prerequisites.

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

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A4.1/5.0
Disambiguation4/5

Each get_/list_ tool targets a distinct resource and the descriptions carefully separate similar pairs like get_application_context vs get_workspace_summary and get_broadcast_details vs get_broadcast_analytics. The main ambiguity is apply_actions vs validate_actions, since one runs the other's validation, but the descriptions make that relationship explicit.

Naming Consistency4/5

Names consistently follow verb_object snake_case and use familiar verbs like create, get, list, and update. Minor deviations such as read_messages instead of list_messages, apply_actions/validate_actions with plural nouns, and run_flow_autotest are still predictable and readable.

Tool Count2/5

33 tools exceeds the 25-tool threshold and makes the surface feel heavy, even though the domain is broad. Many of the read-only getters are individually useful but could be consolidated, such as merging module catalog/details or workspace/application context.

Completeness4/5

Core workflows are covered: application lifecycle, flow editing through apply_actions, deployment, contacts, broadcasts, modules, and message/event reads. Minor gaps exist, such as no dedicated delete for contacts, applications, or broadcasts, and no rollback for deployments, but agents can work around or avoid these.