Sautikit

desk_merge_contacts

Destructive

Merges a duplicate SautiDesk contact into a primary contact (requires desk.supervise).

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": {
      "primary_id": "<primary_id>",
      "secondary_id": "<secondary_id>"
    },
    "name": "desk_merge_contacts"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`purpose`	No	Required on tools that read data or reports; recommended on every tool. One sentence: what you are doing and why (for example "finding this caller's open ticket to answer them"). Building a report, dashboard, analytics or an export is a SautiDesk Pro feature done by the report tools, not by pulling records.
`primary_id`	Yes	UUID of the surviving primary contact
`secondary_id`	Yes	UUID of the duplicate contact to merge into primary_id

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedNov 5, 2026

TDQS

B3.4/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is partly covered. The description adds genuinely useful context the annotations lack: the required desk.supervise permission. However, it does not say what happens to the duplicate's related records (tickets, tasks, activity), whether the merge is reversible, or what is returned, which matters for a destructive operation.

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?

One sentence with zero waste, and the core action plus the permission prerequisite are front-loaded. It is arguably under-specified rather than over-long, but as written every clause earns its place.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a destructive, three-parameter merge with no output schema, the definition covers the action, the direction, and the permission requirement, but omits what gets carried over from the secondary record and whether the operation can be undone. That leaves a real gap for an irreversible mutation.

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%, and the schema itself labels primary_id as the surviving contact and secondary_id as the duplicate. The description's phrasing ('duplicate ... into a primary contact') reinforces that direction but adds no format, constraint, or edge-case detail beyond the schema.

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 (Merges) and resource (SautiDesk contact) and even encodes directionality: a duplicate is merged into a primary contact. That is enough for an agent to tell it apart from desk_update_contact or desk_create_contact, though it never names those siblings.

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?

The word 'duplicate' implies the situation (two records that are the same person), which is implicit when-to-use guidance, but there is no explicit condition for choosing this over desk_update_contact or desk_list_contacts/desk_lookup_contact to find the duplicates first.

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

All Sautikit 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.

Resources

Need Help?