Unlink a contact from a company in Teamleader Focus CRM. Use this action when a contact should no longer be associated with a specific company.
Unlink a contact from a company.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| id | Yes | The contact ID | |
| company_id | Yes | The company ID to unlink the contact from |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.2Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are present, so the description carries the full burden. It only states the action without disclosing side effects, permissions, reversibility, or what happens to the relationship. For a mutation tool, this is a significant gap.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
A single, front-loaded sentence with no fluff. It is appropriately concise for a simple operation.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
For a simple unlink operation, the description is minimally adequate, but it lacks any mention of whether the contact is deleted, if the operation is idempotent, or if there are any prerequisites. Given the absence of annotations and output schema, a bit more context would be helpful.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
The schema already describes both parameters ('The contact ID' and 'The company ID to unlink the contact from'), covering 100% of parameters. The description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema, so the baseline of 3 applies.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description 'Unlink a contact from a company' clearly states the verb and resource, and implicitly distinguishes from siblings like link_contact_to_company and update_contact_company_link. It is specific and unambiguous.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
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 the alternative link or update operations. The agent is left to infer the appropriate context from the name alone.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.