Import contacts from a vCard (.vcf) file to map phone numbers and email addresses to display names for your AI assistant's memory.
Import contacts from a vCard (.vcf) file.
Export from macOS Contacts: File → Export → Export vCard. Maps phone numbers and email addresses to display names.
Args: file_path: Path to the .vcf file
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| file_path | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.4.1Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations exist, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It does disclose a meaningful trait beyond the schema — that phone numbers and email addresses get mapped to display names — but says nothing about duplicate handling, whether existing contacts are merged or replaced, or what side effects the import has. That is a notable gap for a mutation tool with zero annotation coverage.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Front-loaded with the one-line purpose, followed by a focused export tip and a short Args block. No redundant restatement of the tool name; the macOS export hint is arguably optional but earns its place as practical input guidance.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
For a simple one-parameter import with no output schema, the description covers purpose, input format, and one behavioral detail (name mapping). It omits what happens to pre-existing contacts and where the data lands, which an agent would want before invoking a write operation.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema description coverage is 0%, so the schema documents nothing about the single parameter. The description compensates with an Args block clarifying file_path is a path to the .vcf file, adding format meaning beyond the bare 'string' type. It is minimal but fills the coverage gap.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
States a specific verb and resource ('Import contacts') plus the exact input format (vCard/.vcf), which distinguishes it from import_csv_file and import_json_file in the sibling set. It stops short of explicitly naming those alternatives, so 4 rather than 5.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
Provides a concrete 'how to produce the input' tip (macOS Contacts export path), which is genuinely useful context. However, it gives no guidance on when to use this versus sync_contacts or the other import_* tools, nor any prerequisites or exclusions.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.