viber-mcp

send_contact

Send a contact card to a Viber user by providing the recipient's user ID, contact name, and phone number.

Instructions

Send a contact card to a Viber user

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": {
      "receiver": "<receiver>",
      "name": "<name>",
      "phone_number": "<phone_number>"
    },
    "name": "send_contact"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`receiver`	Yes	Viber user ID of the receiver
`name`	Yes	Contact name
`phone_number`	Yes	Contact phone number
`sender_name`	No	Display name override (≤28 chars)
`sender_avatar`	No	Avatar URL override

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0May 26, 2026

TDQS

B3.2/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

Without annotations, the description must convey behavioral traits. It only states what the tool does ('send a contact card') but omits details like whether it's idempotent, required permissions, rate limits, or error behavior.

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, concise sentence with no filler words. It's appropriately front-loaded.

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?

With 5 parameters, 3 required, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is too brief. It doesn't explain what a contact card contains, how overrides work, or what the user receives, leaving the agent under-informed.

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?

All 5 parameters have descriptions in the input schema (100% coverage), so the description adds minimal additional meaning. Baseline of 3 is appropriate.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the action ('Send'), the resource ('contact card'), and the target ('Viber user'), distinguishing it from sibling tools like send_message, send_picture, etc.

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 like send_message or send_file. There is no mention of prerequisites, restrictions, or typical use cases.

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

Deploy Server