Skip to main content
Glama
debanjanbasu

grr

by debanjanbasu
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Rust
Local

people.people.batchDeleteContacts

Deletes multiple contacts in a single request while preserving non-contact data. Use it to remove batches of contacts without deleting unrelated resources.

Instructions

Delete a batch of contacts. Any non-contact data will not be deleted. Mutate requests for the same user should be sent sequentially to avoid increased latency and failures [HTTP POST] — creates or triggers a change; refused under --readonly safety profiles. Returns the API's response resource as JSON — request body is a JSON BatchDeleteContactsRequest object accepting resourceNames; pass it via params or whole via body_file Siblings over the same resource: batchCreateContacts, batchUpdateContacts, createContact, deleteContact, deleteContactPhoto, get, getBatchGet, listDirectoryPeople, searchContacts, searchDirectoryPeople, updateContact, updateContactPhoto.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
queryNoExtra KEY=VALUE query pairs for endpoints whose parameters Discovery does not describe.
paramsNoParameter map merged into the request; typed parameters win.
dry_runNoReturn the request that would be sent, without sending it.
body_fileNoRead the request body from this file ('-' for stdin) instead of building one from the parameters. The body is a JSON BatchDeleteContactsRequest object.
request_bodyNoRequest body of type BatchDeleteContactsRequest: pass it via `params` (merged into the built body) or whole via `body_file`.

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / body_file / description
      Previous value: -"Read the request body from this file ('-' for stdin) instead of building one from the parameters."New value: +"Read the request body from this file ('-' for stdin) instead of building one from the parameters. The body is a JSON BatchDeleteContactsRequest object."
    • addedInput schema / properties / request_body
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Request body of type BatchDeleteContactsRequest: pass it via `params` (merged into the built body) or whole via `body_file`.",
+  "properties": {
+    "resourceNames": {
+      "items": {
+        "type": "string"
+      },
+      "type": "array"
+    }
+  },
+  "type": "object"
+}
  2. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "type": "object"
+}
  3. First observed

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden well: it flags the operation as a mutation ([HTTP POST] — creates or triggers a change), notes it is refused under --readonly safety profiles, and states the response is returned as JSON. It omits that batch delete of contacts is permanent/irreversible and what partial-failure behavior looks like, which is the main remaining gap.

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?

Purpose is front-loaded in the first clause, and each subsequent sentence carries distinct information (data scope, sequencing rule, HTTP/readonly behavior, body passing, siblings). It is dense and slightly run-on, with the sibling enumeration being lengthy, but not padded.

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

Completeness5/5

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

For a 5-parameter batch mutation with nested request body and an existing output schema, the description supplies the mutation semantics, the readonly safety behavior, the concurrency caveat, and body-passing mechanics. Return values need not be explained since an output schema exists.

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% and all five parameters (query, params, dry_run, body_file, request_body.resourceNames) are already documented in the schema. The description restates that resourceNames goes via `params` or `body_file` but adds no format, limits, or semantics beyond structured data, so baseline 3 applies.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb and resource ('Delete a batch of contacts') immediately, and scopes it with 'Any non-contact data will not be deleted'. The closing sibling list explicitly positions it against deleteContact (single) and batchCreateContacts/batchUpdateContacts, so an agent can distinguish it without opening schemas.

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?

Gives concrete operational guidance absent from other fields: send mutate requests for the same user sequentially to avoid latency/failures, and it names all sibling tools over the same resource. It never states an explicit 'prefer X over Y' rule or the prerequisite that resourceNames must reference existing contacts, so it stops short of a 5.

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