fiken-mcp

fiken_list_contacts

Read-only

Retrieve all contacts for your company using filters like name, email, customer, or supplier to manage your contact list efficiently.

Instructions

Retrieves all contacts for the company. Supports many filters.

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": "fiken_list_contacts"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`name`	No
`page`	No
`email`	No
`group`	No
`sortBy`	No	e.g. "name asc"
`customer`	No
`inactive`	No
`pageSize`	No
`supplier`	No
`createdDate`	No	YYYY-MM-DD
`lastModified`	No	YYYY-MM-DD
`memberNumber`	No
`createdDateGe`	No
`createdDateGt`	No
`createdDateLe`	No
`createdDateLt`	No
`customerNumber`	No
`lastModifiedGe`	No
`lastModifiedGt`	No
`lastModifiedLe`	No
`lastModifiedLt`	No
`supplierNumber`	No
`organizationNumber`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.1.0Jul 30, 2026

TDQS

C2.7/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the tool is clearly a read operation. The description adds 'Supports many filters' but does not disclose behavioral aspects like pagination, sorting, or that unfiltered calls return all contacts.

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

Conciseness3/5

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

The description is very concise (two sentences) but at the cost of completeness. It is front-loaded but lacks needed details.

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

Completeness1/5

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

With no output schema, 23 parameters, and no details on pagination, defaults, or what constitutes a 'contact', the description is far from complete for an AI agent to use effectively.

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

Parameters2/5

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

Schema description coverage is only 13%, yet the description only generically says 'Supports many filters' without explaining individual parameters or their relationships. For such a large parameter set (23 params), this is insufficient.

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 ('Retrieves all contacts') and resource ('for the company'). It identifies the tool as a list operation, but does not differentiate from sibling tools like fiken_get_contact which retrieves a single contact.

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., fiken_get_contact for a specific contact). It also does not mention pagination, potential large result sets, or default behavior when no filters are applied.

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

Deploy Server