Skip to main content
Glama

dialogbrain

by io.github.saloprj
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

contacts_add_channel

🔗 Link a channel identity (email, phone, Telegram/WhatsApp handle) to an existing contact.

When to use:

  • User learns a contact's email or phone and wants to save it

  • Adding a second channel for an existing person

Email/phone are stamped as the contact's identity keys, so channel sync attaches the matching conversation to the same contact automatically. If the identity already belongs to a DIFFERENT contact, the call fails unless merge_if_linked=true — which IRREVERSIBLY merges the two contacts into one. Requires contact_id (entity_id) from contacts.find.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
valueYesEmail address, phone number, or username for this channel
channelYesChannel type to add
contact_idYesentity_id from contacts.find/contacts.sync; when sync returned no entity_id, pass its person_id instead
display_nameNoOptional display label for this identity
in_workspaceNoRun this one call in this workspace id instead of the session's. Nothing is stored; other sessions are not affected.
merge_if_linkedNoIf the identity already belongs to a DIFFERENT contact, merge that contact into this one (IRREVERSIBLE — the other contact record is deleted). Default false: the call fails instead of merging.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / in_workspace
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Run this one call in this workspace id instead of the session's. Nothing is stored; other sessions are not affected.",
+  "type": "integer"
+}
  2. Added
  3. Removed
  4. First observed

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With annotations already declaring readOnly=false/destructive=false, the description still adds substantial context: identity-key stamping, automatic channel sync, fail-by-default behavior, and the irreversible merge. Note the merge path deletes a contact record while destructiveHint=false — the description is the more accurate source, so the annotation is arguably under-declared rather than contradicted (the destructive action is opt-in via merge_if_linked).

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?

Purpose is front-loaded, followed by tight when-to-use bullets, then a clearly delineated caveat paragraph. Every sentence carries weight and the most dangerous behavior (IRREVERSIBLE merge) is called out rather than buried.

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 mutating tool with no output schema, the description covers purpose, usage, identity semantics, and the critical merge caveat thoroughly. The only gap is that it does not say what the call returns on success (e.g., updated contact/identity), which is a minor omission.

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 the schema already documents all six parameters including merge_if_linked and contact_id sourcing. The description reinforces identity-key meaning and the contacts.find provenance, but adds little the schema lacks, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 first sentence gives a specific verb (link/add) and resource (channel identity: email, phone, Telegram/WhatsApp handle) scoped to an existing contact. It clearly distinguishes this from generic contact mutation siblings like contacts_update or contacts_merge by focusing on attaching a single identity channel.

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?

The explicit 'When to use' bullets give real context (learning an email/phone, adding a second channel), and the description explains the merge-vs-fail fork. It stops short of naming alternative tools for adjacent cases (e.g., contacts_update for other fields), so it is clear rather than exhaustive.

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

All dialogbrain 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