CallMCP — Phone Call MCP Server

Get Business Verification Documents

get_business_verification

Read-onlyIdempotent

Read tenant-scoped business-verification document references, pending/approved/rejected staff-review states and secure upload requirements. No file bytes, storage paths, signed URLs or tax identifiers. Uploads happen on the secure owner page, by an admin; rejected documents can be corrected and uploaded again. Internal staff verification is separate from carrier registration. Reviewer notes are returned as staff-written data.

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": {
      "business_id": "<business_id>"
    },
    "name": "get_business_verification"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`business_id`	Yes

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description
`error`	No	Present when success is false
`success`	Yes	Whether the tool completed successfully
`has_more`	No
`documents`	No
`upload_url`	No
`provider_submission`	No
`upload_requirements`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedNov 12, 2026

TDQS

A3.9/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly/idempotent/non-destructive, and the description adds real context beyond them: the response deliberately omits file bytes, storage paths, signed URLs and tax identifiers, and reviewer notes are flagged as staff-written data. It also discloses that rejected documents can be corrected and re-uploaded elsewhere. It doesn't cover permissions or failure behavior, keeping it short of a 5.

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?

Five compact sentences, front-loaded with the primary read scope before the exclusions. The middle sentences stack several negatives and facts together, but nothing is padded or redundant.

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?

With an output schema present, return values need no explanation, and the description supplies what the structured data cannot: scope, deliberate data omissions, where uploads actually occur, and the trust status of reviewer notes. An agent has enough to call this correctly and interpret the result safely.

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

Parameters2/5

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

Schema description coverage is 0% and the sole parameter, business_id, is never described. The phrase 'tenant-scoped' weakly signals that the ID sets the tenancy boundary, but it does not say whether it is a business record ID, whether it must match the caller's own tenant, or what happens on a mismatch.

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 names a specific verb and resource: read tenant-scoped business-verification document references plus pending/approved/rejected staff-review states. It also fixes the boundary by stating 'Internal staff verification is separate from carrier registration,' which lets an agent distinguish it from the surrounding get_* siblings 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 Guidelines3/5

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

Usage is implied rather than stated: the reader learns this is a read-only inspection call and that uploads belong on the 'secure owner page, by an admin,' which is useful negative guidance. However, there is no explicit 'use this when…' trigger and no named sibling tool to pick instead, so routing still requires inference.

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.