Skip to main content
Glama

fluentcrm_delete_contact

Remove a contact from FluentCRM marketing automation by specifying the subscriber ID to delete contact data from the WordPress plugin.

Instructions

Usuwa kontakt z FluentCRM

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
subscriberIdYesID kontaktu do usunięcia

Implementation Reference

  • MCP tool handler case that executes the delete contact tool by calling the FluentCRMClient's deleteContact method with the provided subscriberId.
    case 'fluentcrm_delete_contact':
      return { content: [{ type: 'text', text: JSON.stringify(await client.deleteContact((args as any)?.subscriberId), null, 2) }] };
  • Core helper method in FluentCRMClient that performs the actual API deletion of a contact by subscriber ID.
    async deleteContact(subscriberId: number) {
      const response = await this.apiClient.delete(`/subscribers/${subscriberId}`);
      return response.data;
    }
  • Tool registration in the listTools response, including name, description, and input schema definition.
    {
      name: 'fluentcrm_delete_contact',
      description: 'Usuwa kontakt z FluentCRM',
      inputSchema: {
        type: 'object',
        properties: {
          subscriberId: { type: 'number', description: 'ID kontaktu do usunięcia' },
        },
        required: ['subscriberId'],
      },
    },
  • Input schema definition for the fluentcrm_delete_contact tool, specifying required subscriberId parameter.
    inputSchema: {
      type: 'object',
      properties: {
        subscriberId: { type: 'number', description: 'ID kontaktu do usunięcia' },
      },
      required: ['subscriberId'],
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. While 'Usuwa' clearly indicates a destructive operation, the description doesn't specify whether deletion is permanent, reversible, requires specific permissions, affects related data (e.g., lists, tags), or what happens on success/failure. For a destructive tool with zero annotation coverage, this is inadequate.

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 in Polish that directly states the tool's function without unnecessary words. It's appropriately sized for a simple deletion tool with one parameter.

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?

For a destructive operation with no annotations and no output schema, the description is insufficient. It doesn't explain what happens after deletion (success response, error conditions), whether the action affects other entities, or any behavioral constraints. The combination of destructive nature and lack of structured metadata requires more comprehensive description.

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?

The schema description coverage is 100%, with the single parameter 'subscriberId' clearly documented as 'ID kontaktu do usunięcia' (ID of contact to delete). The description doesn't add any additional parameter information beyond what's in the schema, but with complete schema coverage, the baseline score of 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 action ('Usuwa' - removes/deletes) and the resource ('kontakt z FluentCRM' - contact from FluentCRM). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like fluentcrm_update_contact or fluentcrm_get_contact by specifying deletion, but doesn't explicitly differentiate from other deletion tools like fluentcrm_delete_campaign or fluentcrm_delete_tag.

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. It doesn't mention prerequisites (e.g., needing a valid subscriberId), consequences of deletion, or when to choose this over other contact management tools like fluentcrm_update_contact or fluentcrm_detach_contact_from_list.

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

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/netflyapp/fluentcrm-mcp-server'

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