Update a contact's profile, custom fields, or subscription state by specifying the contact ID.
Update a contact's profile fields, custom fields, or subscription state.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| apiKey | No | Send16 API key (overrides SEND16_API_KEY env var) | |
| lastName | No | ||
| contactId | Yes | Contact ID | |
| firstName | No | ||
| subscribed | No | ||
| customFields | No |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.5.7Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description bears full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It only indicates 'Update' (mutation) but lacks details on overwrite vs merge behavior, required permissions, side effects, or error conditions. Essential behavioral traits are missing.
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 that efficiently communicates the core action and what can be updated. No extraneous words; every part earns its place.
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?
Given 6 parameters, nested objects (customFields), no output schema, and low schema description coverage, the description is too minimal. It omits return values, error handling, and parameter format details, leaving significant gaps for an AI agent.
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?
Schema description coverage is low (33%). The description adds context by grouping parameters into 'profile fields, custom fields, or subscription state', which helps interpret firstName, lastName, subscribed, customFields. However, it does not explain customFields format or apiKey override, partially compensating for the schema gap.
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 clearly states the verb 'Update' and the resource 'contact', specifying the updatable aspects: profile fields, custom fields, or subscription state. This precisely distinguishes it from sibling tools like create_contact, delete_contact, and add_contacts_to_audience.
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 alternatives, no prerequisites, no when-not-to-use advice. The description gives no context for appropriate usage scenarios.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.