KaiCalls

Get Text Registration

get_text_registration

Read-onlyIdempotent

Read where a business stands on its own carrier registration for business texting: saved details (never the EIN; only whether one is on file), payment, filing stage, whether sales texts are allowed, and the one next step. Also returns known (details already on file from signup, the owner's account and any caller ID registration, to confirm with the owner) missing (only the questions still to ask, in order, each with a one-line why the carriers need it) and next_question (ask the owner this one, then the next). Mirrors the dashboard's text registration page. Read-only.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`business_id`	Yes

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`addon`	No
`error`	No	Present when success is false
`known`	No
`chasers`	No
`missing`	No
`success`	Yes	Whether the tool completed successfully
`next_step`	No
`setup_url`	No
`ein_on_file`	No
`registration`	No
`next_question`	No
`next_step_text`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedSep 30, 2026
- addedOutput schema / properties / next_question
```
Added value: +{
+  "type": [
+    "object",
+    "null"
+  ]
+}
```

Changed3 schema fields changedSep 29, 2026

addedOutput schema / properties / ein_on_file
```
Added value: +{
+  "type": "boolean"
+}
```
addedOutput schema / properties / known
```
Added value: +{
+  "type": "object"
+}
```

addedOutput schema / properties / missing

Added value: +{
+  "items": {
+    "type": "object"
+  },
+  "type": "array"
+}

AddedSep 29, 2026

TDQS

A4.1/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive, making the safety bar low; the description still adds real value by disclosing that the EIN is never returned (only presence), that the result mirrors the dashboard's text registration page, and how `known`/`missing`/`next_question` behave. It omits nothing contradicting the annotations.

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?

Front-loads the core purpose in the first clause and each sentence is substantive, but the middle sentence is a dense run-on packing three return fields and their semantics. Still, little is pure filler.

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 single-param read tool with a full output schema, the description is more than adequate; the return-field detail is arguably redundant given the output schema, but the privacy note (EIN never returned) and dashboard parity are genuinely needed context.

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 0%, so the schema carries no meaning for `business_id`, and the description never mentions the parameter or its expected value. With only one self-evident identifier parameter this is not fatal, but the description does nothing to compensate for the coverage gap.

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?

States a specific verb ('Read') and resource ('where a business stands on its own carrier registration for business texting'), and enumerates the facets read (saved details, payment, filing stage, texting permission, next step). This clearly distinguishes it from siblings like save_text_registration_details and start_text_registration_checkout.

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?

Implied read-side counterpart to save_text_registration_details and text-registration checkout, and the description frames the workflow (confirm `known` with the owner, then ask `next_question`). No explicit when-not or named alternative, so it stops short of a 5.

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

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.