Skip to main content
Glama

get-outlook-contact

get-outlook-contact
Read-only

Retrieve a specific Outlook contact's properties and relationships by ID, with options to expand navigation properties, select fields, and paginate results via Microsoft Graph.

Instructions

Retrieve the properties and relationships of a contact object. There are two scenarios where an app can get a contact in another user's contact folder:

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
expandNoNavigation properties to inline, e.g. attachments on a message or event. Only navigation properties can be expanded: expanding a non-navigation property such as a message body fails with "Parsing OData Select and Expand failed", and an unsupported value may be ignored rather than reported. Request ordinary fields with $select instead.
selectNoComma-separated fields to return, e.g. id,subject,from,receivedDateTime
contactIdYesValue for the 'contactId' path segment. Pass it under the name 'contactId', not as 'id'. Use the 'id' field of the contact object as returned by Microsoft Graph.
fetchAllPagesNoFollow @odata.nextLink and merge up to 100 pages into one response. Can return enormous payloads—only when the user explicitly needs a full export. Prefer a small $top first, then paginate or narrow with $filter/$search.
includeHeadersNoInclude response headers (including ETag) in the response metadata
excludeResponseNoExclude the full response body and only return success or failure indication
Behavior2/5

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false. The description's 'Retrieve' is consistent with that. However, it adds no further behavioral context (e.g., permissions, return format, or the two scenarios it started to explain). The incomplete sentence prevents any meaningful disclosure beyond the annotations.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness2/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is not concise; it is a truncated fragment. It starts a second sentence about 'two scenarios' but never finishes, making it structurally incomplete. The core purpose is stated efficiently, but the dangling clause undermines conciseness.

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

Completeness1/5

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

The description is critically incomplete. It promises to describe two scenarios but fails to do so, which is likely essential for proper use (e.g., accessing contacts in other users' folders). With no output schema and no guidance on return values or special cases, the description is nowhere near sufficient for an agent to call this tool correctly.

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% for all six parameters, so the schema fully documents them. The description itself mentions no parameters and adds no extra meaning. This meets the baseline for full schema coverage.

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?

The description clearly states the verb 'Retrieve' and the resource 'properties and relationships of a contact object', which distinguishes it from list operations like list-outlook-contacts. However, it does not explicitly contrast with any sibling, so it's clear but not fully distinguishing.

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

Usage Guidelines1/5

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

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It begins to mention 'two scenarios where an app can get a contact in another user's contact folder' but is cut off, leaving the reader without any usage context or exclusions.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/A-Impact-Pavel/ms365-mcp'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server