Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
freeagent-mcp-server

freeagent-mcp-server

by samaxbytez
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Hybrid

freeagent_delete_contact

Destructive

Delete a contact from FreeAgent by contact ID, removing outdated or incorrect contact records from the accounting account.

Instructions

Delete a contact from FreeAgent

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "contact_id": "<contact_id>"
    },
    "name": "freeagent_delete_contact"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
contact_idYesThe ID of the contact to delete

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv3.0.0
    • removedInput schema / additionalProperties
      Removed value: -false
  2. First observedv1.3.0

TDQS

C2.9/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, so the safety profile is covered by structured data. The description adds nothing beyond that: no statement about irreversibility, whether deletion is soft or hard, what happens to contacts referenced by invoices/expenses, or what an error looks like. For a destructive mutation such context would be the main value-add.

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?

A single short sentence, front-loaded with the verb and resource and free of filler. It is efficient, though its brevity reflects thin content rather than disciplined editing.

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?

This is a destructive, irreversible-by-implication operation on a financial system's contact record, yet the description offers nothing an agent needs before invoking it: no confirmation semantics, no side-effect warning, no recovery path. With no output schema and no annotations beyond the hint flags, the description should carry more of that burden.

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?

Only one parameter and schema description coverage is 100%, with the schema already stating 'The ID of the contact to delete'. The description adds no format hints, no note on where to obtain contact_id (e.g. freeagent_list_contacts), so the baseline 3 for full schema coverage applies.

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?

States a specific verb ('Delete') and resource ('a contact') scoped to FreeAgent, which is unambiguous. Sibling differentiation is implicit via the resource name (delete_invoice, delete_estimate, delete_project all follow the same pattern), so the description doesn't need to argue the distinction, but it also doesn't state what counts as a contact here.

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 when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance, and no mention of alternatives such as freeagent_update_contact if the intent was to deactivate rather than remove. The agent gets no signal about prerequisites (permissions, whether the contact has linked invoices) before choosing this tool.

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