CallMCP — Phone Call MCP Server

Generate Activity Report

agency_report_generate

Destructive

Generate and save an activity report snapshot for an existing client installation at its expected revision. Requires current client membership and agency access. Queues report email for due owner-approved subscriptions to existing verified client members and advances their schedule; queued does not mean delivered.

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>",
      "installationId": "<installationId>",
      "expectedRevision": "<expectedRevision>"
    },
    "name": "agency_report_generate"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`partnerId`	Yes	The agency (partner) workspace ID.
`installationId`	Yes	The agency package installation to act on.
`expectedRevision`	Yes	The installation revision you last read. The call is rejected if the installation has changed since.

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

A4.1/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Goes well past the annotations by disclosing authorization prerequisites, the optimistic-concurrency guard, and a real side effect: it queues an email for owner-approved subscriptions and advances their schedule. The caveat "queued does not mean delivered" closes a likely false assumption about async delivery, which the destructiveHint/idempotentHint flags alone would not convey.

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?

Four tight sentences, front-loaded with the action and followed by prerequisites and then side effects in a logical order. Dense but every clause carries information; only minor compression would be possible.

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?

With an output schema present, return values need not be explained, and the description covers access requirements, the revision guard, and the email/schedule side effect. It leaves the term "snapshot" somewhat undefined (where it lives, whether prior snapshots are replaced), a minor gap for a destructive, non-idempotent tool.

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% and all three parameters are fully described there, including the rejection behavior for expectedRevision. The description restates the revision-edition intent and the notion of an "existing" installation but adds no format or value-level meaning beyond the schema, so the baseline applies.

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 concrete verb+resource pair ("Generate and save an activity report snapshot") scoped to a client installation at a given revision. It is clearly distinguishable from agency_report_configure, which configures rather than produces. It stops short of naming any sibling for explicit contrast.

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?

Gives usable preconditions: an existing client installation, current client membership, and agency access. It does not state when to prefer configure/report-retrieval siblings or what to do when preconditions fail, but the selection context is clear enough to act on.

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.