Skip to main content
Glama

remove_connection

Remove a connection from your LinkedIn network by supplying the person's profile URL. The request is processed asynchronously, and you can track its status with the returned workflow ID.

Instructions

Allows you to remove a person from your connections (st.removeConnection action). If this workflow is still running, do not retry this tool; retrying can queue duplicate removal attempts for the same person.

Linked API actions are queued into a cloud-browser workflow and may take several minutes. The server returns immediately after starting the workflow with {status: 'pending'|'running', pendingReason, workflowId, operationName, message}. To retrieve the final result, call get_workflow_result with the returned workflowId and operationName — it will long-poll until completion or the request budget elapses, then return either the final result or another in-progress snapshot. Do not retry the original tool while a workflow is still running; that creates duplicate queued work.

A pending workflow carries pendingReason: 'queued' means it is waiting its turn behind other work on the same account and will start within minutes. 'outsideWorkingHours' means the account has configured working hours and the workflow is parked until they reopen — possibly the next working day. In that case get_workflow_result returns immediately instead of polling, message states when the window opens, and you should report that to the user rather than looping.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
personUrlYesPublic or hashed LinkedIn URL of the person you want to remove from your connections. (e.g., 'https://www.linkedin.com/in/john-doe')
Behavior5/5

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

With no annotations, the description fully discloses the asynchronous behavior: queued workflows, immediate server response shape, long-polling for results, and duplicate-removal risk on retry. It also explains the meaning of pendingReason values ('queued' vs 'outsideWorkingHours')—all essential beyond what annotations would provide.

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?

The description is verbose but appropriately structured into three logical sections: purpose, retry warning and workflow mechanics, then pendingReason handling. Every sentence carries actionable information, though it could be slightly tightened without losing clarity.

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

Completeness5/5

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

Given the tool's complexity (async workflow, no annotations, no output schema), the description is remarkably complete. It covers the response format, how to poll for results, and edge cases like outsideWorkingHours, fully equipping an agent to handle the tool correctly.

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 100%: the personUrl parameter is fully documented in the input schema. The description adds no extra parameter semantics beyond referring to the person; the baseline 3 applies since the schema already does the heavy lifting.

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 tool's purpose: to remove a person from connections, and even names the underlying st.removeConnection action. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like send_connection_request or check_connection_status.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

The description explicitly warns against retrying while the workflow is running and directs the user to call get_workflow_result with the returned workflowId and operationName instead. It also provides guidance on how to handle the 'outsideWorkingHours' pendingReason, telling the agent to report to the user rather than loop.

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/zecloud/remote-mcp-linkedin'

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