Skip to main content
Glama
felipfr

LinkedIn MCP Server

by felipfr

get_connections

Extract your entire LinkedIn connections list to manage and analyze your professional network effectively using the MCP server's data integration capabilities.

Instructions

Retrieve your complete LinkedIn connections list

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Implementation Reference

  • src/server.ts:178-192 (registration)
    Registers the 'get-connections' MCP tool, including name, description, emptyParams schema reference, and handler lambda that delegates to clientService.getConnections() and formats MCP response.
    this.server.tool(
      'get-connections',
      'Retrieve the current user connections',
      linkedinApiSchemas.emptyParams,
      async () => {
        this.logger.info('Retrieving User Connections')
        try {
          const connections = await this.clientService.getConnections()
          return this.createResourceResponse(connections)
        } catch (error) {
          this.logger.error('User Connections Retrieval Failed', error)
          throw error
        }
      }
    )
  • Core handler function that executes the tool logic by making an authenticated GET request to LinkedIn API /connections endpoint to fetch user's connections.
    public async getConnections(): Promise<ConnectionsResult> {
      return this.makeRequest<ConnectionsResult>('get', '/connections?start=0&count=100')
    }
  • emptyParams schema (empty object) used for the get-connections tool, indicating no input parameters are required.
    /**
     * Empty parameters schema for endpoints without required parameters
     */
    emptyParams: {},
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden but offers minimal behavioral insight. It implies a read operation ('Retrieve') but doesn't disclose authentication needs (though sibling 'authenticate_linkedin' hints at this), rate limits, pagination behavior, or data format. For a tool with zero annotation coverage, this leaves significant gaps in understanding how it behaves.

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?

The description is a single, efficient sentence that directly states the tool's function without any fluff. It's front-loaded with the core action and resource, making it easy to parse. Every word earns its place, with no wasted verbiage.

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?

Given zero parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is minimally adequate. It tells what the tool does but lacks details on authentication, return format, or error handling. For a simple retrieval tool, this might suffice, but the absence of output schema means the description should ideally hint at what 'complete LinkedIn connections list' entails.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The tool has zero parameters, and schema description coverage is 100% (since there's no schema to describe). The description adds no parameter information, which is appropriate here. Baseline for zero parameters is 4, as there's nothing to compensate for and the description doesn't mislead about inputs.

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 action ('Retrieve') and resource ('your complete LinkedIn connections list'), making the purpose immediately understandable. It distinguishes from siblings like 'get_connection_requests' (which retrieves pending requests) and 'search_people' (which searches broadly). However, it doesn't explicitly contrast with these alternatives, keeping it from a perfect score.

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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'get_connection_requests' or 'search_people'. It mentions 'complete' list, which implies no filtering, but doesn't state when this unfiltered retrieval is preferred over more targeted tools. No prerequisites or exclusions are mentioned.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Related Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/felipfr/linkedin-mcpserver'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server