Skip to main content
Glama
Synctest-hub

BoldSign MCP Server

by Synctest-hub

get_contact

Retrieve detailed contact information from BoldSign using the contact's unique ID to access signer details for document signing workflows.

Instructions

This tool utilizes the BoldSign API to retrieve detailed information for a specific contact within your organization. To use this tool, you need to provide the unique identifier (ID) of the contact you wish to retrieve. Contacts are primarily used to store signer details, identified by their unique email address, for use when creating and sending documents for signature within the BoldSign application.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYesRequired. The unique identifier (ID) of the contact to retrieve. This can be obtained from the list contacts tool.

Implementation Reference

  • The main handler function that creates a ContactsApi instance, configures it with base path and API key, fetches the contact details by ID, and returns a formatted McpResponse or handles errors.
    async function getContactHandler(payload: GetContactSchemaType): Promise<McpResponse> {
      try {
        const contactsApi = new ContactsApi();
        contactsApi.basePath = configuration.getBasePath();
        contactsApi.setApiKey(configuration.getApiKey());
        const contactsDetails: ContactsDetails = await contactsApi.getContact(payload.id);
        return handleMcpResponse({
          data: contactsDetails,
        });
      } catch (error: any) {
        return handleMcpError(error);
      }
    }
  • Zod schema defining the input for the get_contact tool, requiring a contact ID.
    const GetContactSchema = z.object({
      id: commonSchema.InputIdSchema.describe(
        'Required. The unique identifier (ID) of the contact to retrieve. This can be obtained from the list contacts tool.',
      ),
    });
  • Tool definition object that registers the 'get_contact' tool with its method name, description, input schema, and a wrapper handler delegating to the main handler.
    export const getContactToolDefinition: BoldSignTool = {
      method: ToolNames.GetContact.toString(),
      name: 'Get contact',
      description:
        'This tool utilizes the BoldSign API to retrieve detailed information for a specific contact within your organization. To use this tool, you need to provide the unique identifier (ID) of the contact you wish to retrieve. Contacts are primarily used to store signer details, identified by their unique email address, for use when creating and sending documents for signature within the BoldSign application.',
      inputSchema: GetContactSchema,
      async handler(args: unknown): Promise<McpResponse> {
        return await getContactHandler(args as GetContactSchemaType);
      },
    };
  • Array that includes the getContactToolDefinition as part of contacts API tools, which is further aggregated into the main tools list.
    export const contactsApiToolsDefinitions: BoldSignTool[] = [
      getContactToolDefinition,
      listContactsToolDefinition,
    ];
  • Main tools definitions array that spreads contactsApiToolsDefinitions, making get_contact available to the MCP server.
    export const definitions: BoldSignTool[] = [
      ...contactsApiToolsDefinitions,
      ...documentsApiToolsDefinitions,
      ...templatesApiToolsDefinitions,
      ...usersApiToolsDefinitions,
      ...teamsApiToolsDefinitions,
    ];

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changedv1.0.0
    • addedInput schema / $schema
      Added value: +"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"
    • addedInput schema / additionalProperties
      Added value: +false
  2. First observed

TDQS

B3.2/5.0
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 describes the read operation ('retrieve') and mentions contacts are used for signer details, but lacks information about authentication requirements, rate limits, error handling, or what 'detailed information' includes. For a read tool with zero annotation coverage, this leaves significant behavioral gaps.

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 reasonably concise with two sentences that efficiently cover purpose and usage. The first sentence states the core function, and the second provides context about contacts. However, the second sentence could be more focused on tool-specific guidance rather than general contact usage.

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

Completeness3/5

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

For a single-parameter read tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description provides adequate basic information but lacks completeness. It doesn't describe the return format, error conditions, or authentication needs. The mention of contact usage in document workflows adds some context, but more behavioral details would be needed for full completeness.

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 the single required 'id' parameter. The description adds marginal value by noting the ID is 'unique' and 'can be obtained from the list contacts tool', but doesn't provide format examples or additional constraints beyond what the schema specifies. Baseline 3 is appropriate when 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 tool's purpose: 'retrieve detailed information for a specific contact within your organization' using the BoldSign API. It specifies the verb (retrieve) and resource (contact), but doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'list_contacts' beyond mentioning that contacts are used for signer details in document workflows.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

The description implies usage by stating 'To use this tool, you need to provide the unique identifier (ID) of the contact you wish to retrieve' and mentions contacts are used for signer details in document creation. However, it doesn't provide explicit guidance on when to use this vs. alternatives like 'list_contacts' or 'get_user', nor does it specify prerequisites or exclusions.

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