Headquarter

by axeldotdev

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

TypeScript

Local

delete_contact

Permanently remove a contact record using the contact ID and client ID.

Instructions

Delete a contact

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>",
      "client_id": "<client_id>"
    },
    "name": "delete_contact"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`id`	Yes	Contact ID (slug)
`client_id`	Yes	Client ID (slug)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.1Jun 28, 2026

TDQS

C2.7/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, and the description does not disclose behavioral traits such as irreversibility, required permissions, or cascade effects. For a destructive action, this is insufficient.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness2/5

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

The description is excessively minimal (three words) and adds no value beyond the tool name. While concise, it under-specifies the tool's behavior.

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 simplicity of a delete operation with two required parameters and no output schema, the description is barely adequate. Missing details like idempotency, response format, and error conditions.

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% with clear descriptions for both parameters (id and client_id as slugs). The description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema, so baseline score of 3 applies.

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 'Delete a contact' clearly states the action and resource. However, it does not differentiate from sibling delete tools (e.g., delete_client), but the tool name itself and input schema specifying contact ID make it unambiguous.

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 like update_contact or list_contacts. There is no mention of prerequisites, such as needing to check if the contact exists before deletion.

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