Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Connections

by icu.connections
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Find a warm intro path

connections_contacts_find_warm_path
Read-only

Find who in this member's network could introduce them to one named person: mutual connections, ranked warmest first by how recently and often the member talked to each. Call this when they ask who can introduce them to someone. If the person is not on Connections the result says there is no path; several name matches are all returned. Read-only; it requests no introduction.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameYesThe person to reach, as the member said it. Must be someone already in their contacts.
limitNoHow many routes to return (default 10, maximum 50).
personNoLinked person to run this call as (first name). Omit to run as the connection's holder.
projectNoWorkspace to run this call in (id or name).

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / person
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Linked person to run this call as (first name). Omit to run as the connection's holder.",
+  "type": "string"
+}
  2. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / project
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Workspace to run this call in (id or name).",
+  "type": "string"
+}
  3. Added

TDQS

A4.1/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=false, so the description's real contribution is edge-case behavior: it explains what happens when the target is not on Connections ("says there is no path") and when names are ambiguous ("several name matches are all returned"). The explicit "requests no introduction" clause usefully confirms no side effect is triggered, though cost/pagination behavior is unstated.

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?

Four tight sentences with no filler, front-loading the core capability before the trigger and the edge cases. The usage sentence overlaps slightly with the opening but is short enough not to be waste.

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 read-only lookup with no output schema, the description covers what matters for correct invocation: scope, ranking, ambiguity handling, and the empty-result case. It leaves the shape of a returned path (fields per connection) unspecified, which is acceptable given no output schema exists.

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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so all four parameters are already documented; baseline is 3. The description adds a little meaning, notably that results are ordered warmest-first (which gives 'limit' a meaningful sort order) and that 'name' may match several people, but it never mentions the 'person' or 'project' scoping parameters.

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 specific verb and resource (find who could introduce them to one named person) plus the mechanism (mutual connections) and the ranking rule (warmest first by recency and frequency). An agent can distinguish this from connections_contacts_request_introduction without opening either schema.

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 an explicit trigger: "Call this when they ask who can introduce them to someone." It also implicitly routes away from the write-side sibling by noting "it requests no introduction," though it never names connections_contacts_request_introduction as the alternative for actually sending a request.

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

All Connections 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