Skip to main content
Glama

Numbers Online — phone intelligence

by online.numbers

Caller risk signal

caller_risk
Read-onlyIdempotent

Return a labeled, low-confidence risk read for an inbound caller: a spam signal (0–100, higher = riskier), verstat passthrough, and a first-party do-not-contact (DNC) signal — without a name dip. A supplementary input to the agent's own policy, never a verdict on whether to accept or reject the call. Supply the call's STIR/SHAKEN verstat to fold it into the signal — a failed validation raises the risk.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
numberYesPhone number in E.164, e.g. +14155552671 (loose input is normalized).
verstatNoOptional STIR/SHAKEN verstat for THIS call — TN-Validation-Passed / -Failed / No-TN-Validation, or a full Identity / P-Asserted-Identity header value. When supplied it folds into the risk signal (a failed validation raises it).

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint. Description adds behavioral context: 'low-confidence', impact of failed STIR/SHAKEN validation raising risk, and that it is never a final verdict. No contradiction.

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?

Description is a single concise paragraph that front-loads the primary output. Every sentence adds value with no redundancy. Could be slightly more structured with bullets, but efficient.

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 tool with high schema coverage, no output schema, and low complexity, the description covers what is returned, how to use it, and its role. Missing explicit mention of return format but components are listed.

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

Parameters4/5

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

Schema coverage is 100% with descriptions for both parameters. Description adds meaning: number is normalized, verstat can be full header, and that verstat folds into risk signal. Provides value beyond the schema.

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?

Specifically states it returns a risk read with spam signal, verstat passthrough, and DNC signal, and explicitly distinguishes from siblings by noting 'without a name dip' and as a 'supplementary input' not a verdict.

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?

Clearly indicates when to use (supplementary to agent's own policy, not a verdict) and mentions supplying verstat to influence risk. Lacks explicit when-not-to-use or alternative tool references, but context is strong.

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

All Numbers Online — phone intelligence toolsInspect
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.

TDQS

A4.1/5.0
Disambiguation3/5

Tools overlap significantly: phone_lookup includes spam signals and DNC check, while caller_risk and dnc_check provide more specific or constrained functionality. Descriptions help differentiate use cases, but an agent might struggle to choose between them.

Naming Consistency4/5

All tool names use snake_case and are descriptive (e.g., caller_risk, dnc_check, line_type, phone_lookup). The pattern is mostly consistent, though verbs and noun combinations vary slightly.

Tool Count5/5

Four tools cover the core needs of phone intelligence (quick classification, risk assessment, DNC check, comprehensive lookup) without redundancy. The scope is well-matched to the domain.

Completeness4/5

The set covers essential operations for phone intelligence: basic line info, risk, DNC, and a full lookup. Minor gaps exist (e.g., no tool for updating DNC preferences), but given the server's advisory role, these are acceptable.

Resources