CallMCP — Phone Call MCP Server

Enroll Clients in Offer

agency_enrollment_enroll

Idempotent

Commits the previewed batch: creates new client businesses, records owner approvals and queues package installations for every ready client; installations later configure each client voice agent. Requires an agency owner, admin or operator who created the session, its idempotency key, and the fingerprint and revision from preview. Clients that are not ready are reported with their next step instead of being installed.

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": {
      "partnerId": "<partnerId>",
      "sessionId": "<sessionId>",
      "expectedRevision": "<expectedRevision>",
      "fingerprint": "<fingerprint>",
      "approvalIds": "<approvalIds>"
    },
    "name": "agency_enrollment_enroll"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`partnerId`	Yes	The agency (partner) workspace ID.
`sessionId`	Yes	The enrollment session to commit.
`approvalIds`	Yes	The approval IDs returned by preview for existing clients.
`fingerprint`	Yes	The fingerprint returned by preview.
`idempotencyKey`	No	Stable key for this request; reuse it when retrying the same request.
`expectedRevision`	Yes	The session revision returned by preview.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description
`error`	No	Present when success is false
`receipt`	No
`success`	Yes	Whether the tool completed successfully

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedNov 12, 2026

TDQS

A4.3/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, idempotentHint=true and destructiveHint=false, and the description adds genuinely new context: the authorization prerequisite (agency owner, admin or operator who created the session), the fact that non-ready clients are skipped and reported rather than failing the batch, and that installations are only queued now and configure voice agents later. The one wrinkle is that it calls the idempotency key required while the schema omits it from the required list, which could confuse an agent about retry semantics.

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 sentences, front-loaded with the commit action and its side effects before the requirements and the partial-failure rule. Dense but every clause carries information; the parenthetical about installations later configuring voice agents is the only softening detail.

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 consequential multi-effect mutation with six parameters, the description covers prerequisites, idempotent retry, and partial-success behavior, and an output schema exists so return values need not be explained. It stops short of stating whether the commit is atomic or what happens on a revision/fingerprint conflict, which an agent would still want before calling.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3, and the description earns above that by tying fingerprint, revision and approvals back to preview output and describing the idempotency key's reuse-on-retry purpose. It does not explain why approvalIds is capped at 150 or how to handle a fingerprint mismatch, but the parameter meaning is largely reinforced rather than duplicated.

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?

Names a specific verb and resource ('Commits the previewed batch') and immediately enumerates the concrete effects: creates client businesses, records owner approvals, queues package installations. That is enough for an agent to tell it apart from agency_enrollment_preview or agency_enrollment_save without opening a schema.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

Establishes the precondition clearly by referring to 'the previewed batch' and to the fingerprint and revision 'from preview', so the agent knows a preview must exist first. It also states the fallback for clients that are not ready (reported with their next step rather than installed). It never names the sibling preview tool explicitly, so the routing is inferred rather than stated.

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

All CallMCP — Phone Call MCP Server tools Inspect

Try in Browser

One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.