Skip to main content
Glama

local-mcp

by com.local-mcp

Get Contact

get_contact
Read-only

Gets a contact from the Mac's Contacts app (Contacts.app) by name or ID. Pass name to look up directly by name (no need to search_contacts first — if several people match it returns a compact list to choose from), or contact_id for an exact lookup. For Microsoft 365 use m365_get_contact instead.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameNoFull or partial contact name — the one-step path. Provide this OR contact_id.
contact_idNoExact identifier from list_contacts/search_contacts. Provide this OR name.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

TDQS

A4.7/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already convey read-only and non-destructive behavior. The description adds valuable context beyond that by explaining that a name-based lookup may return a compact list if multiple people match, which is exactly the kind of behavioral nuance an agent needs. It does not contradict the 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?

Three sentences with no wasted words. It opens with the primary purpose, then explains parameter usage, and closes with a clear sibling-tool pointer—all front-loaded and well-structured.

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 simple, read-only tool with an output schema and rich annotations, the description is fully sufficient. It covers purpose, usage alternatives, multi-match behavior, and sibling differentiation, leaving no significant gaps.

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%, but the description enriches the parameters by explaining that name is a one-step path and contact_id is an exact identifier from list_contacts/search_contacts. It also reinforces the either/or relationship between the parameters, adding meaning beyond the schema.

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 it retrieves a contact from the Mac's Contacts.app by name or ID, which is a specific verb+resource. It also distinguishes itself from m365_get_contact and indicates there is no need to call search_contacts first, making its purpose unambiguous.

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?

It explicitly tells when to use this tool (local Mac contacts) and when not to (use m365_get_contact for Microsoft 365). It also explains the two usage modes (name for direct lookup, contact_id for exact lookup) and reassures the agent that prior search is unnecessary.

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

All local-mcp 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

A3.5/5.0
Disambiguation3/5

Many tools are clearly distinct per app (e.g., chrome_*, safari_*, m365_*), but there is notable overlap between generic file tools like `file_list` and `finder_list`, both listing files; `search_contacts` and `list_contacts` serve similar purposes; `report_friction` and `report_problem` both send feedback to the team. The large number of tools with similar purposes in different domains creates moderate ambiguity for an agent.

Naming Consistency4/5

The naming convention is very consistent overall: most tools follow a `{app}_action` or `verb_noun` pattern (e.g., `chrome_click`, `create_calendar_event`, `list_reminders`). There are minor deviations like `lmcp_install_upgrade` (two verbs) and `complete_omnifocus_task` vs. `complete_reminder` (inconsistent verb placement). Still, the pattern is predictable and readable across the full set.

Tool Count2/5

With 225 tools, the surface is extremely large and heavy. While it covers many distinct domains (browsers, mail, calendar, files, notes, reminders, video editing, web automation, etc.), the sheer number makes it hard to navigate and likely includes many rarely-used tools. This is far beyond the well-scoped range of 3-15 tools and feels excessive even for a 'local everything' MCP server.

Completeness3/5

For many app integrations, the tool set provides solid CRUD coverage (e.g., Calendar has create, read, update, delete; Apple Notes has create, read, update, list, search; OmniFocus has create, list, search, complete). However, some areas are incomplete: for example, there is no tool to create a new Mail folder or delete notes. The 'web' tools lack a clear update/delete for saved sessions. The suite is broad but has notable gaps within individual domains.

Resources