Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Summer

by ai.gosummer.api
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin
This connector has been deprecated

This was a duplicate manual listing. Use Summer’s official listing, imported from the official MCP Registry. Summer’s MCP server remains active at https://api.gosummer.ai/mcp. Setup and documentation: https://gosummer.ai/docs/mcp-clients.

Remove a partner contact

summer_partners_contacts_remove
Destructive

Remove a partner contact. Mail or Slack posts to it go back to an unknown audience. The entry and the reason stay in the history.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "company": "<company>",
      "environment": "<environment>",
      "id": "<id>",
      "reason": "<reason>"
    },
    "name": "summer_partners_contacts_remove"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYes
reasonYesWhy you are making this change. Kept in the history.
companyYes
environmentYes
idempotency_keyNoReuse the same key when retrying the same change

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Added

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=false, but the description adds genuinely non-obvious behavior: active mail/Slack routes to the contact fall back to an unknown audience, and the removal plus reason persists in history (a soft-delete/audit trail). It stops short of stating reversibility or whether the contact can be re-added.

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?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with the action, then consequence, then audit behavior. Nothing is repeated from the schema or annotations and no sentence is filler.

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

Completeness4/5

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

For a destructive 5-parameter tool with no output schema, the description covers the two things an agent most needs: what breaks downstream and what is retained. It is short of complete because it never explains parameter scope (company/environment) or retry semantics implied by the non-idempotent hint.

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 40% — company, environment, and id are undocumented — and the description adds no meaning for any of the five parameters. The agent gets no guidance on scoping the removal to a company/environment or on why an idempotency_key is useful when the operation is marked non-idempotent.

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 first sentence states a specific verb and resource ('Remove a partner contact'), which cleanly separates it from the sibling summer_partners_contacts_save. It does not explicitly name the sibling or define what a 'partner contact' is, so an agent must infer that from context.

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?

There is no explicit 'use when' or 'do not use when' guidance and no named alternative. The consequence sentence (mail/Slack posts reverting to an unknown audience) implicitly signals that this is a consequential action worth confirming, but the agent must infer the decision criteria.

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

All Summer toolsInspect
Try in Browser
One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources