Skip to main content
Glama

spix_contact_tag

Add or remove tags from contacts in the Spix MCP server to organize and categorize contact information for better management.

Instructions

Add or remove tags from a contact

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
contact_idYesContact ID
addNoTags to add
removeNoTags to remove

Implementation Reference

  • The schema definition for the contact.tag tool. MCP tool names are dynamically generated from this path, resulting in 'spix_contact_tag'.
        path="contact.tag",
        cli_usage="spix contact tag <contact_id> --add <t> --remove <t>",
        http_method="POST",
        api_endpoint="/contacts/{contact_id}/tags",
        mcp_expose="tool",
        mcp_profile="safe",
        description="Add or remove tags from a contact",
        positional_args=[
            CommandParam("contact_id", "string", required=True, description="Contact ID"),
        ],
        params=[
            CommandParam("add", "array", description="Tags to add"),
            CommandParam("remove", "array", description="Tags to remove"),
        ],
    ),
  • The generic tool handler that dispatches all tool calls, including 'spix_contact_tag', to the appropriate backend API endpoint defined in the registry.
    async def create_tool_handler(
        session: McpSessionContext,
        tool_name: str,
        arguments: dict,
    ) -> list:
        """Execute an MCP tool call by dispatching to the backend API.
    
        This function:
        1. Resolves the tool name to a command schema
        2. Validates session scope (playbook access, channel access)
        3. Builds the API request
        4. Dispatches to the backend
        5. Returns the response as MCP TextContent
    
        Args:
            session: The MCP session context for scope validation.
            tool_name: The MCP tool name (e.g., "spix_playbook_create").
            arguments: The tool arguments from the MCP client.
    
        Returns:
            List containing a single TextContent with the JSON response.
        """
        # Import here to avoid circular imports and handle missing mcp package
        try:
            from mcp.types import TextContent
        except ImportError:
            # Fallback for when mcp is not installed
            class TextContent:  # type: ignore[no-redef]
                def __init__(self, type: str, text: str) -> None:
                    self.type = type
                    self.text = text
    
        # Resolve tool name to schema
        schema = get_schema_by_tool_name(tool_name)
        if not schema:
            return [
                TextContent(
                    type="text",
                    text=orjson.dumps(
                        {"ok": False, "error": {"code": "unknown_tool", "message": f"Unknown tool: {tool_name}"}}
                    ).decode(),
                )
            ]
    
        # Validate tool access (not disabled)
        try:
            session.validate_tool_access(schema.path)
        except Exception as e:
            from spix_mcp.session import McpScopeError
    
            if isinstance(e, McpScopeError):
                return [TextContent(type="text", text=orjson.dumps({"ok": False, "error": e.to_dict()}).decode())]
            raise
    
        # Validate channel access if applicable
        channel = infer_channel_from_tool(schema.path)
        if channel:
            try:
                session.validate_channel_access(channel)
            except Exception as e:
                from spix_mcp.session import McpScopeError
    
                if isinstance(e, McpScopeError):
                    return [TextContent(type="text", text=orjson.dumps({"ok": False, "error": e.to_dict()}).decode())]
                raise
    
        # Handle playbook_id: validate and apply default
        playbook_id = arguments.get("playbook_id")
        try:
            effective_playbook = session.validate_playbook_access(playbook_id)
            if effective_playbook and not playbook_id:
                # Apply default playbook
                arguments["playbook_id"] = effective_playbook
        except Exception as e:
            from spix_mcp.session import McpScopeError
    
            if isinstance(e, McpScopeError):
                return [TextContent(type="text", text=orjson.dumps({"ok": False, "error": e.to_dict()}).decode())]
            raise
    
        # Build endpoint URL with path parameters
        endpoint, remaining_args = build_endpoint_url(schema, arguments)
    
        # Dispatch to backend API
        client = session.client
        method = schema.http_method.lower()
    
        if method == "get":
            response = await asyncio.to_thread(client.get, endpoint, params=remaining_args if remaining_args else None)
        elif method == "post":
            response = await asyncio.to_thread(client.post, endpoint, json=remaining_args if remaining_args else None)
        elif method == "patch":
            response = await asyncio.to_thread(client.patch, endpoint, json=remaining_args if remaining_args else None)
        elif method == "delete":
            response = await asyncio.to_thread(client.delete, endpoint, params=remaining_args if remaining_args else None)
        else:
            response = await asyncio.to_thread(client.get, endpoint)
    
        # Build response envelope
        envelope: dict = {"ok": response.ok, "meta": response.meta}
        if response.ok:
            envelope["data"] = response.data
            if response.pagination:
                envelope["pagination"] = response.pagination
            if response.warnings:
                envelope["warnings"] = response.warnings
        else:
            envelope["error"] = response.error
    
        return [TextContent(type="text", text=orjson.dumps(envelope).decode())]
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the action ('Add or remove tags') which implies a mutation, but doesn't disclose any behavioral traits such as required permissions, whether changes are reversible, rate limits, or what happens if tags don't exist. This is inadequate 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.

Conciseness5/5

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

The description is a single, efficient sentence with zero waste—it directly states the tool's function without fluff. It's appropriately sized and front-loaded, making it easy to parse quickly. Every word earns its place.

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's complexity (a mutation operation with 3 parameters) and lack of annotations and output schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't cover behavioral aspects like error conditions, response format, or side effects. For a tag management tool that modifies data, this leaves significant gaps in understanding how to use it effectively.

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%, so the schema already documents all three parameters (contact_id, add, remove) with clear descriptions. The description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema provides—it doesn't explain tag formats, constraints, or interactions between add/remove. Baseline 3 is appropriate when the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 action ('Add or remove') and resource ('tags from a contact'), making the purpose immediately understandable. It distinguishes this from sibling contact tools like spix_contact_create or spix_contact_list by focusing on tag management specifically. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from other tag-related tools (none in the sibling list), so it's not a perfect 5.

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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention prerequisites (e.g., needing an existing contact), exclusions (e.g., cannot add/remove tags simultaneously), or related tools like spix_contact_show for checking current tags. Usage is implied but not explicitly stated.

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/Spix-HQ/spix-mcp'

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