noticed

add_to_network

Idempotent

Add someone to your network. Known (e.g. a search_people hit) → tracked; new → created/imported + tracked. Accepts person_id OR free_form:{name,…} + optional tags and relationship_types (how you know them — set it right here at add time, no follow-up update_person needed). Returns canonical person_id. DEDUPE: a new free_form contact that strongly matches someone you already have returns { created:false, potential_duplicates, confirmation_token } instead of creating — track the existing person, or re-call with the confirmation_token only if it's genuinely someone new.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`tags`	No	Initial tags to apply. Prefer an existing tag from your network over coining a near-duplicate (reuse `sf`, don't add `san-francisco`); lowercase, and use the event:/place:/topic: namespaces where they fit.
`free_form`	No	A brand-new contact to create + track. Use when there is no person_id.
`person_id`	No	person_id of an existing search_people hit to start tracking.
`custom_name`	No	Your own display name for this person.
`confirmation_token`	No	From a prior potential_duplicates response — pass it back to create despite the flagged duplicates (only after the user confirms it's a new person).
`relationship_types`	No	How you know this person, from the closed set: family, close_friend, friend, acquaintance, coworker, alumni, customer, vendor, advisor, investor. Values outside this set are dropped. Coworker and Alumni may be inferred from reliable shared history; all other roles require an explicit user statement. Set it here at add time — no follow-up update_person needed.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`ok`	Yes	Whether noticed completed the operation.
`data`	No	The operation result when ok is true.
`error`	No	A human-readable error when ok is false.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedSep 11, 2026

changedInput schema / properties / relationship_types / description

Previous value: -"How you know this person, from the closed set: family, close_friend, friend, coworker, ex_coworker, advisor_investor, customer, vendor, acquaintance. Values outside this set are dropped. Set it here at add time — no follow-up update_person needed."New value: +"How you know this person, from the closed set: family, close_friend, friend, acquaintance, coworker, alumni, customer, vendor, advisor, investor. Values outside this set are dropped. Coworker and Alumni may be inferred from reliable shared history; all other roles require an explicit user statement. Set it here at add time — no follow-up update_person needed."

Changed1 schema field changedAug 22, 2026

changedOutput schema / (root)

Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "$schema": "http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#",
+  "additionalProperties": true,
+  "properties": {
+    "data": {
+      "additionalProperties": true,
+      "description": "The operation result when ok is true.",
+      "properties": {
+        "confirmation_token": {
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        "created": {
+          "type": "boolean"
+        },
+        "person_id": {
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        "potential_duplicates": {
+          "items": {
+            "additionalProperties": true,
+            "properties": {
+              "company": {
+                "$ref": "#/properties/data/properties/potential_duplicates/items/properties/person_id"
+              },
+              "display_name": {
+                "type": "string"
+              },
+              "headline": {
+                "$ref": "#/properties/data/properties/potential_duplicates/items/properties/person_id"
+              },
+              "id": {
+                "type": "string"
+              },
+              "name": {
+                "type": "string"
+              },
+              "person_id": {
+                "type": [
+                  "string",
+                  "null"
+                ]
+              }
+            },
+            "type": "object"
+          },
+          "type": "array"
+        }
+      },
+      "type": "object"
+    },
+    "error": {
+      "description": "A human-readable error when ok is false.",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "ok": {
+      "description": "Whether noticed completed the operation.",
+      "type": "boolean"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "ok"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}

First observedAug 22, 2026

TDQS

A4.8/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already declare the safety profile (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true), but the description adds real behavioral context beyond them: it discloses the return value (canonical person_id) and the non-obvious dedupe path returning {created:false, potential_duplicates, confirmation_token} instead of creating. That is precisely the kind of side-effect disclosure the annotations cannot convey.

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?

Front-loads the core purpose, then the known-vs-new branch, then the return value and the DEDUPE edge case in labelled form. It is dense, but each clause carries decision-relevant information (input routing, return value, dedupe remedy) rather than filler.

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 tool with nested objects, six parameters, an output schema, and idempotency annotations, the description covers the routing decision, the side effect, the return contract, and the dedupe workflow that an agent must handle. Nothing required to invoke it correctly is missing, and return-format detail is appropriately left to the output schema.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3, but the description adds meaning the schema does not: the mutually exclusive person_id-OR-free_form relationship, the free_form:{name,…} shape, and the closed-set/enum-like reading of relationship_types with the 'no follow-up update_person' note. It doesn't restate every field, but it clarifies the decision logic binding the parameters together.

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 ('Add someone to your network') and immediately distinguishes the two input modes: an existing search_people hit (tracked) versus a new contact (created/imported + tracked). It also names siblings operationally (search_people, update_person) so an agent can place it in the toolset without opening a schema.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

Explicitly says when to use person_id ('Known ... a search_people hit') versus free_form ('new'), and calls out the dedupe branch with the exact condition and remedy ('re-call with the confirmation_token only if it's genuinely someone new'). Also notes relationship_types should be set here to avoid a follow-up update_person call.

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

All noticed 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?