Dayze — Life Context

Remove Contact Phone or Email

remove_person_contact_method

Remove one extra phone number or email address from a contact (kind phone|email, value as stored). The primary phone and email are cleared with update_person instead. Other entries are kept. undo_contact_change(change_id) puts it back. ($0.05; API key required)

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": {
      "person_id": "<person_id>",
      "kind": "<kind>",
      "value": "<value>"
    },
    "name": "remove_person_contact_method"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`kind`	Yes	Whether this extra contact method is a phone or an email, e.g. phone.
`value`	Yes	The phone number or email address to remove.
`person_id`	Yes	An owned contact id.
`request_id`	No	Client idempotency key (retries return original result).
`idempotency_key`	No	Alias for request_id.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description
`account`	No	The Dayze account this data belongs to. With more than one Dayze connection, name it in the answer.
`message`	No
`removed`	No
`change_id`	No	Pass to undo_contact_change to put it back.
`person_id`	No
`provenance`	No	Which connector wrote the record and which connected Dayze account received it.
`person_name`	No
`extra_emails`	No
`extra_phones`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

AddedNov 10, 2026

TDQS

A4.9/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the annotations it discloses the reversibility mechanism with the exact undo tool and key argument, the blast radius (other entries kept), the cost ($0.05), and the auth requirement (API key). These are the operational facts an agent needs before committing a mutation, and none of them are recoverable from the annotation hints alone.

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 compact sentences, front-loaded with the operation and scope, then the exclusion, then the undo path and cost. Every clause carries information; no filler or repetition of the schema.

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?

For a reversible single-field mutation with an output schema present, this covers scope, exclusion, reversibility, side effects, price, and auth. Return-value shape is correctly left to the output schema, so nothing material is missing.

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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3, but the description adds real meaning: the kind is constrained to phone|email and the value must be supplied "as stored", which warns against reformatting a number or address before removal. It says nothing extra about person_id or the idempotency aliasing, which the schema already covers.

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?

States a precise verb (remove) and a precisely scoped resource (one extra phone number or email address on a contact), and explicitly excludes the primary phone/email, which routes the agent to update_person. An agent can distinguish this from add_person_contact_method, remove_person_alias, and update_person without opening any schema.

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?

Gives explicit when-to-use and when-not-to-use: extra entries here, primary phone/email via update_person. It also names the recovery path (undo_contact_change(change_id)) and states that other entries are unaffected, so there is nothing left to infer.

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

All Dayze — Life Context tools Inspect

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.