Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
alga-psa-mcp

alga-psa-mcp

Official
by WYRE-AI
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

alga_contacts_get

Read-only

Retrieves a single contact by ID and returns full details after a list or search so you can inspect the record.

Instructions

Get one contact by ID. Use after a list or search to see full details.

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": {
      "id": "<id>"
    },
    "name": "alga_contacts_get"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare this a safe, non-destructive read. The description adds the useful distinction that this returns 'full details' versus the summary shapes implied by list/search, but says nothing about what happens with an unknown ID, whether records can be soft-deleted, or permissions.

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?

Two short, front-loaded sentences with no filler. Efficient, though correspondingly thin on detail.

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-record read with read-only annotations this is close to sufficient, but there is no output schema, so the vague promise of 'full details' is the only hint at the return shape, and error behavior for bad IDs is unaddressed.

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 coverage is 0% and the single parameter has pattern and length constraints but no prose. The description only says 'by ID', leaving unclear whether the ID is a contact ID, external ID, or key from another system. Minimal compensation for the coverage gap.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Get one contact') plus the scoping key ('by ID'), which clearly distinguishes it from the list and search siblings. It stops short of naming any sibling explicitly, but the singular-vs-list contrast is unambiguous.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

'Use after a list or search to see full details' gives concrete workflow guidance: this is a follow-up lookup once an ID is known, not an entry point. No exclusion or error-case guidance is given, but the selection context is clear.

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