make.fun

Your contact

get_contact

Read-onlyIdempotent

Your account's own email and phone number, which the site may use to reach you about your entries and prizes. Only your account and the site's admins see them (never on a public page, a leaderboard, the archive, an export or another tool); they are not your sign-in. Answers each value (email trimmed with its domain lowercased, phone in E.164), when it was verified, when a code sent to it expires, and the channels this server can send codes on (verify_channels; empty: none). Signed in only: send your account's API key (an af_ key) as the x-api-key header of the MCP connection; without one it answers 401. Verify one over HTTP: POST /api/me/contact/<email|phone>/send sends a 6-digit code to it, POST /api/me/contact/<email|phone>/confirm with {"code"} confirms it.

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": "get_contact"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`email`	Yes
`phone`	Yes
`verify_channels`	Yes
`email_verified_at`	Yes
`phone_verified_at`	Yes
`email_code_expires_at`	Yes
`phone_code_expires_at`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedNov 8, 2026

TDQS

A4.6/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Adds substantial context beyond the readOnly/idempotent annotations: privacy scope (visible only to the account and site admins, never on public pages, leaderboards, archives, or exports), auth requirement with the exact 401 failure mode, and normalization behavior for each returned value. It also discloses the meaning of an empty verify_channels, which is exactly the kind of edge case an agent would otherwise misread.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Purpose and privacy scope are front-loaded, followed by auth and return-shape details in a logical order. The final sentence packing the two HTTP verification routes is dense and arguably beyond a zero-parameter read tool, but it earns its place by preventing an agent from hunting for a verify tool.

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?

Covers auth, privacy, value formatting, verification metadata, and the empty-channel case, which is everything needed for a zero-param read tool. An output schema exists, so the return-value detail is bonus rather than a gap-filler.

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?

The tool takes no parameters, so there is nothing beyond the schema to explain and the baseline of 4 applies. The description cannot add parameter meaning because none exists.

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?

Opens with a specific verb-free but unambiguous resource statement: "Your account's own email and phone number." It immediately distinguishes this from get_profile/set_contact by scoping to the caller's own contact values and explicitly noting "they are not your sign-in."

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Gives clear preconditions ("Signed in only... an af_ key as the x-api-key header; without one it answers 401") and points to the HTTP flow for verification, which tells the agent this tool is read-only and mutation happens elsewhere. It never names set_contact as the write alternative, so the routing is implied rather than explicit.

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

All make.fun tools Inspect

Try in Browser

Claude Code, inside the Godot 4 editorFlockbay puts an AI agent in the real Godot 4 editor: it writes GDScript, runs your game and fixes what breaks. Free, or bring your own Claude Code or Codex.flockbay.comAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.