CallMCP — Phone Call MCP Server

get lsa setup

get_lsa_setup

Read-onlyIdempotent

Inspect Google LSA account selection and sync freshness, with setup steps. Saved configuration never proves a live workflow. Cloud-project production access is not shown here; Google Cloud reports it.

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_lsa_setup"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`business_id`	Yes

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`error`	No
`success`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedNov 12, 2026

TDQS

B3.4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already cover the safety profile (readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive), and the description still adds non-obvious behavioral context: that returned configuration is a saved record and does not evidence a live workflow. The scope disclaimer about cloud-project access further prevents misreading the result. It stops short of describing pagination or latency, but the substantive caveats are present.

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 short sentences with no filler, front-loaded with what is inspected. Slightly telegraphic phrasing ('saved configuration never proves a live workflow') costs a little readability, but nothing is redundant.

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

Completeness3/5

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

An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained, and the safety profile is annotation-covered. What is missing is the one thing only the description can supply: what the required business_id means, and how to choose this tool over get_lsa_account_report. Adequate but with a clear gap.

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 single required parameter 'business_id' (uuid) is never mentioned in the description. The rule is that at low coverage the description must compensate, and here it does not — an agent gets no guidance on which business identifier form to supply or what happens if the business has no LSA setup.

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?

Names a specific verb ('Inspect') and resource ('Google LSA account selection and sync freshness') plus an included deliverable ('setup steps'). It is distinguishable from the reporting siblings (get_lsa_report, get_lsa_account_report), though it never states that contrast explicitly so the boundary is inferred from the word 'setup'.

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?

The sentence 'Saved configuration never proves a live workflow' hints at a caution condition and 'Cloud-project production access is not shown here' carves out a scope exclusion. However, the exclusion points at an external system (Google Cloud), not at a sibling tool, so no alternative is actually named and no positive 'use this when…' trigger is given.

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.