Skip to main content
Glama

Leadconnector

by io.github.pipeworx-io

Leadconnector Get Contact

leadconnector_get_contact
Read-onlyIdempotent

Fetch a single CRM contact by its contact ID. Returns full detail: name, email, phone, tags, source, custom fields, and timestamps. Requires your own GoHighLevel token via _apiKey (plus locationId for a v2 pit- token).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
_apiKeyYesYour own GoHighLevel/LeadConnector token (BYO — Pipeworx does not supply one). Either a v2 Private Integration Token (`pit-` prefixed; Settings → Private Integrations) — pass `locationId` with it — or a legacy v1 Location API key (Settings → Business Profile → API Key). GoHighLevel has retired v1 key creation, so new accounts will have a v2 token.
contactIdYesGoHighLevel contact ID
locationIdNoGoHighLevel sub-account (Location) ID. REQUIRED with a v2 `pit-` token, ignored for a v1 key. It is the id in the dashboard URL: …/location/<locationId>/…

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, and non-destructive behavior. The description adds value beyond those by specifying the returned fields (name, email, phone, tags, source, custom fields, timestamps) and explaining the BYO-token requirement and v1/v2 authentication nuance. No contradiction with 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, each earning its place: the core action, the return payload, and the auth prerequisite. The most important scoping phrase ('single CRM contact by its contact ID') is front-loaded.

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 read-only single-resource fetch with fully documented parameters and safety annotations, the description covers the action, return content, and auth requirements. No pagination or output schema is needed here, and no critical invocation detail is missing.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description summarizes the token and locationId relationship but does not materially add meaning beyond the already-detailed parameter descriptions in 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 uses a specific verb ('Fetch') and resource ('single CRM contact by its contact ID'), and explicitly contrasts with list-style siblings by emphasizing 'single' and 'full detail.' An agent can distinguish this from leadconnector_list_contacts before inspecting parameters.

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?

It clearly states the prerequisite of a BYO GoHighLevel token and the conditional locationId requirement for v2 pit- tokens, which is critical operational guidance. It doesn't explicitly name alternatives for when to use list_contacts instead, but the 'by its contact ID' scoping makes the intended usage clear.

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

All Leadconnector 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
Disambiguation2/5

Multiple tools have overlapping purposes, such as ask_pipeworx and ask_pipeworx_grounded, or bet_research and polymarket_edges. The mix of CRM, data, and betting tools creates confusion about which tool to use for a given task.

Naming Consistency2/5

Tool names are inconsistent, mixing snake_case (ai_visibility_check, ask_pipeworx) with prefixed names (leadconnector_*) and no clear pattern. Some names are vague (forget, remember) while others are specific.

Tool Count2/5

With 32 tools, the set feels overstuffed for a server named 'Leadconnector'. Many tools are unrelated to CRM (e.g., Polymarket, Pipeworx), and the CRM subset is too small to justify the count.

Completeness2/5

For the Leadconnector CRM domain, only basic read operations are provided; missing create, update, delete for contacts, campaigns, and opportunities. The non-CRM tools are comprehensive but don't match the server's name.

Resources