Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Apitomy Data Models MCP

Apitomy Data Models MCP

Official
by Apitomy
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

document_set_contact

Set the contact name, email, and URL in an API document's info section to specify the responsible party.

Instructions

Set the contact information in the document info

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": {
      "session": "<session>"
    },
    "name": "document_set_contact"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
urlNoContact URL
nameNoContact name
emailNoContact email
sessionYesSession name

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.2.1

TDQS

B3.1/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

Without annotations, the description fails to disclose key behavioral traits like whether it overwrites or merges contact fields, requires session validation, or has side effects. Minimal information beyond the verb 'Set'.

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?

The description is a single, clear sentence with no unnecessary words. It is appropriately concise for a straightforward setter tool, though slightly more context could improve usability.

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

Completeness2/5

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

Given the tool has 4 parameters and no output schema, the description is too sparse. It does not explain return values, expected behavior for partial inputs, or how it integrates with the broader document context (e.g., OpenAPI). Sibling tools suggest richer documentation would help.

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?

All parameters have descriptions in the schema (100% coverage), so the description adds no extra meaning beyond field labels. Baseline of 3 applies as per rules.

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 clearly states the action ('Set') and the resource ('contact information in the document info'), making it specific and distinct from siblings like document_set_info or document_delete_contact.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as document_set_info (which may set the whole info object) or document_delete_contact. The description lacks context for decision-making.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools