Mautic MCP Connector

mautic_remove_contact_from_company

DestructiveIdempotent

Removes a contact from a company in Mautic; omit the confirm field for a dry-run preview before executing the write.

Instructions

Remove a contact from a company. POST /api/companies/{companyId}/contact/{contactId}/remove. Omit confirm for a dry-run preview.

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": {
      "company_id": "<company_id>",
      "contact_id": "<contact_id>"
    },
    "name": "mautic_remove_contact_from_company"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`confirm`	No	Set to the boolean true to execute the write. Omit this field for a dry-run preview. false and the string true are rejected.
`company_id`	Yes
`contact_id`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Nov 5, 2026

TDQS

A3.5/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, idempotentHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, so the safety profile is known. The description's real addition is the dry-run-by-default behavior, which is genuinely useful and not in the annotations, but it omits whether the contact record itself is deleted or merely unlinked, and what permissions are required.

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?

Three short fragments, front-loaded with the operation, then the endpoint, then the dry-run caveat. Nothing is wasteful, though the raw HTTP path is low-value for an agent.

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

Completeness4/5

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

For a simple three-parameter mutation with no output schema this is close to sufficient: it names the operation, the resource pair, and the preview mechanism. A note on reversibility/scope (association removed, contact retained) would close the remaining gap.

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?

Schema coverage is only 33%: confirm is documented in the schema, company_id and contact_id are not. The description reinforces confirm's dry-run semantics but adds no meaning for the two required ID parameters, relying on their self-evident names.

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 and resource ('Remove a contact from a company'), and the name plus verb make the contrast with mautic_add_contact_to_company obvious. It stops short of naming that sibling explicitly, but the operation is unambiguous.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description gives one concrete usage instruction ('Omit confirm for a dry-run preview'), which tells the agent how to test before committing. It offers no explicit when-to-use vs when-to-use-instead guidance relative to the add/update company siblings.

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

Deploy Server