Headquarter

by axeldotdev

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

TypeScript

Local

list_contacts

Retrieve all contacts from your Headquarter workspace, with optional filtering by client ID to narrow results.

Instructions

List all contacts, optionally filtered by client

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "list_contacts"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`client_id`	No	Filter by client ID

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.1Jun 28, 2026

TDQS

C2.9/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

Without annotations, the description carries full burden. It only states 'list all', implying read-only, but omits details like pagination, sorting, rate limits, or any side effects. The minimal disclosure falls short for a tool with no annotations.

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?

Single sentence, no redundancy, straight to the point. Efficient and well-structured.

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?

With no output schema and no annotations, the description is too sparse. It does not explain return structure, default behavior, or any constraints (e.g., maximum results). For a listing tool with siblings, more context is needed.

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% (client_id with 'Filter by client ID'). The description restates the optional filter without adding new semantic depth, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 verb 'list' and resource 'contacts', with optional filtering by client. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from the sibling tool 'list_clients', though the resource name itself provides implicit distinction.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., list_clients for clients) or any conditions/limitations. The description is purely declarative with no usage context.

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