KaiCalls

Configure Agent Business Rules

configure_agent_business_rules

DestructiveIdempotent

Safely add or replace a named operational rules section inside an agent inbound prompt, then route the prompt patch through the governed agent.patch broker. Use this for cross-business handoffs, callback language, alert promises, and client-specific operating rules without round-tripping the whole prompt manually.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`mode`	No	replace (default) or append.
`actor`	No	Who is asking: { type: agent\|human\|system\|integration, id, display_name }.
`rules`	Yes	Plain-language operational rules to insert as bullets, e.g. callback capture, sister-location boundaries, urgent alert handling.
`dry_run`	No	Validate and show the prompt patch metadata without writing.
`agent_id`	Yes	KaiCalls agent ID to update
`authority`	No	Attribution only. Caller-supplied authority cannot authorize live changes; authenticated owner review of the stored request is required.
`source_ref`	No	External source reference, such as a support ticket or assistant conversation ID.
`business_id`	No	Business ID. Required when the agent has multiple accessible assignments.
`section_title`	No	Prompt section heading to replace/append. Default: Operational handoff rules.
`idempotency_key`	No	Required for writes. Reuse the same key when retrying the same proposed prompt change.
`queue_for_approval`	No	When authority is missing, create a pending dashboard approval instead of returning needs_approval.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`code`	No
`error`	No	Present when success is false
`result`	No
`status`	No
`success`	Yes	Whether the tool completed successfully
`summary`	No
`agent_id`	No
`approval`	No
`request_id`	No
`business_id`	No
`rules_count`	No
`section_title`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed2 schema fields changedSep 10, 2026

changedInput schema / properties / authority / description

Previous value: -"Human-grade authority for live prompt changes: { mode: human_confirmed|dashboard_session|system_policy, confirmed_by, confirmed_at, confirmation_ref }."New value: +"Attribution only. Caller-supplied authority cannot authorize live changes; authenticated owner review of the stored request is required."

changedInput schema / properties / source_ref / description

Previous value: -"External source reference, such as a support ticket or Claude conversation ID."New value: +"External source reference, such as a support ticket or assistant conversation ID."

AddedJun 24, 2026

TDQS

A4.2/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already flag mutating/destructive/idempotent behavior; the description adds the governance context ('governed agent.patch broker') and claims safety, which are useful for an agent deciding to trust the call. It does not explicitly say that 'replace' overwrites an existing section or detail the review requirement, but the schema's authority field covers that.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the action, and every clause earns its place: purpose, governance path, and use cases. No redundant restating of title or schema.

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 complex 11-parameter tool with a rich schema and output schema, the description supplies the situational context and safety framing needed for selection. It could be more complete about approval/destructive behavior, but those details are already in the schema parameter descriptions.

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 description coverage is 100% and every parameter has a useful description (idempotency_key, authority caveat, business_id condition). The description adds only high-level examples of rule content, which is helpful but not necessary for parameter understanding.

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 precise action and target: 'add or replace a named operational rules section inside an agent inbound prompt,' and identifies the routing path ('agent.patch broker'). The listed use cases (handoffs, callback language, alert promises) make it clear this is not the generic update_agent_config sibling.

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?

'Use this for...' explicitly enumerates the intended scenarios and contrasts with 'round-tripping the whole prompt manually.' It does not state when to avoid it or name a specific alternative tool, so it falls short of full routing guidance.

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

All KaiCalls tools Inspect

Try in Browser

RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.