Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Linkbreakers MCP

by com.linkbreakers
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Disconnect a Contact Tool

contact_integration_disconnect
Destructive

Disconnect a contact tool: visitors stop being synced and the stored credential is deleted. Contacts already there stay.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "contact_integration_disconnect"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
toolNoThe tool to disconnect.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / tool / enum
      Previous value: -[
-  "CONTACT_TOOL_BIRD",
-  "CONTACT_TOOL_BREVO",
-  "CONTACT_TOOL_MAILERLITE",
-  "CONTACT_TOOL_KIT",
-  "CONTACT_TOOL_LOOPS",
-  "CONTACT_TOOL_MAILCHIMP",
-  "CONTACT_TOOL_PIPEDRIVE",
-  "CONTACT_TOOL_FRESHSALES",
-  "CONTACT_TOOL_KLAVIYO",
-  "CONTACT_TOOL_CUSTOMER_IO",
-  "CONTACT_TOOL_HUBSPOT"
-]New value: +[
+  "CONTACT_TOOL_BIRD",
+  "CONTACT_TOOL_BREVO",
+  "CONTACT_TOOL_MAILERLITE",
+  "CONTACT_TOOL_KIT",
+  "CONTACT_TOOL_LOOPS",
+  "CONTACT_TOOL_MAILCHIMP",
+  "CONTACT_TOOL_PIPEDRIVE",
+  "CONTACT_TOOL_FRESHSALES",
+  "CONTACT_TOOL_KLAVIYO",
+  "CONTACT_TOOL_CUSTOMER_IO",
+  "CONTACT_TOOL_HUBSPOT",
+  "CONTACT_TOOL_SALESFORCE",
+  "CONTACT_TOOL_ZOHO_CRM"
+]
  2. Added

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

The destructiveHint annotation only flags that something is destroyed; the description specifies exactly what (the stored credential) and what survives (existing contacts), which is real added value. It stops short of saying whether the integration can be restored without re-running OAuth or what the call returns.

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?

Two short sentences with the core action and its consequences front-loaded; the retention note ('Contacts already there stay') is exactly the detail an agent needs and nothing is wasted.

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 one-parameter destructive tool with no output schema, the definition covers the essential unknowns: side effects and data retention. Missing only secondary details like reconnection requirements or the shape of the confirmation response.

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 single 'tool' parameter is fully described in the schema with an enum of supported providers, so the description need not restate it. It adds no meaning beyond the schema, which is the expected baseline at 100% coverage.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Disconnect a contact tool') and immediately clarifies the effect, making it unambiguously the inverse of contact_integration_connect. It never names a sibling explicitly, so routing relies on the reader inferring the connect/disconnect pairing.

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 by the tool name and the stated consequences, but there is no explicit when-to-use versus when-not guidance, and no pointer to alternatives such as contact_integration_update for changing settings without tearing down the integration.

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

All Linkbreakers MCP 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