Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Sautikit

by io.github.SautiKit
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

respond_to_call_event

Idempotent

Submit the next voice-actions batch for a call under control:"mcp", answering the event_id of a response_required event from wait_for_call_event. Supported verbs: say, play, getDigits, dial, hangup, reject (redirect/conference/record/stream/aiAgent are rejected with 422 in mcp control mode). Idempotent: answering the same event_id twice returns 409 without re-executing the verbs — on 409/410/422, self-correct (fetch a fresh event via wait_for_call_event, or fix the actions payload per the error's details) rather than blindly retrying this same request.

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": {
      "call_id": "<call_id>",
      "event_id": "<event_id>",
      "actions": "<actions>"
    },
    "name": "respond_to_call_event"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
actionsYesvoice-actions array to execute next (same schema as validate_voice_actions); mcp control mode supports say, play, getDigits, dial, hangup, reject — redirect/conference/record/stream/aiAgent are rejected with 422
call_idYesthe call UUID under mcp control (the same call's HD_ session id also works)
purposeNoRequired on tools that read data or reports; recommended on every tool. One sentence: what you are doing and why (for example "finding this caller's open ticket to answer them"). Building a report, dashboard, analytics or an export is a SautiDesk Pro feature done by the report tools, not by pulling records.
event_idYesthe event_id of a response_required event from wait_for_call_event

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Beyond idempotentHint=true, it specifies the actual duplicate-event behavior: answering the same event_id twice returns 409 without re-executing the verbs. It also discloses mode-specific 422 rejections and concrete error-recovery behavior, providing substantial operational context beyond 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?

The description is front-loaded with purpose and workflow, and its three sentences convey useful constraints and recovery advice. It is nevertheless dense, repeats the action allowlist already present in the schema, and contains awkward control-mode quoting, so it is not maximally polished.

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?

For a stateful call-control tool, the workflow trigger, control-mode scope, supported and rejected verbs, duplicate semantics, and error recovery are sufficient to select and invoke it correctly. The fully described schema supplies identifier details and the reference to validate_voice_actions; minor omissions such as the precise meaning of 410 or the success response do not block correct use.

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%, so the baseline is 3. The description reinforces the event_id and actions constraints but largely repeats their schema documentation, while adding no further call_id or purpose semantics; the error guidance is useful operational context rather than new parameter syntax.

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 opening sentence uses a specific verb and resource: submitting the next voice-actions batch for an MCP-controlled call in response to a response_required event. Naming wait_for_call_event also distinguishes this responder from the sibling that supplies the events.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

It explicitly states when to invoke the tool: to answer a response_required event from wait_for_call_event. It also limits the supported action vocabulary, identifies verbs rejected with 422, and directs 409/410/422 recovery toward a fresh event or corrected payload rather than a blind retry.

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

All Sautikit toolsInspect
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.

Resources