Threshold

Ask the host a question

ask_host

Send a question the property record and FAQ don't answer. The answer arrives later; tell the guest you'll follow up. Don't include the guest's contact details. Maps to POST /v1/properties/{id}/questions.

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": {
      "property_id": "<property_id>",
      "question": "<question>"
    },
    "name": "ask_host"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`question`	Yes	The guest's question, in plain words, up to 500 characters. The host's answer may be added to the listing's FAQ.
`property_id`	Yes	The property the question is about.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`answer`	No
`status`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed3 schema fields changedOct 14, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / property_id / description
```
Added value: +"The property the question is about."
```

addedInput schema / properties / question / description

Added value: +"The guest's question, in plain words, up to 500 characters. The host's answer may be added to the listing's FAQ."

changedOutput schema / (root)

Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "additionalProperties": true,
+  "description": "The question as passed to the host, and an answer if the listing already has one.",
+  "properties": {
+    "answer": {
+      "type": [
+        "string",
+        "null"
+      ]
+    },
+    "status": {
+      "type": "string"
+    }
+  },
+  "type": "object"
+}

First observedOct 2, 2026

TDQS

A4.3/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare a non-destructive write with open-world effects, but the description adds the crucial asynchronous trait (the answer arrives later), the required guest-facing follow-up behavior, and a privacy constraint on the payload. That is meaningful disclosure beyond the annotations, though it does not cover failure modes or what the host sees.

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?

Three compact sentences, front-loaded with the use condition, then the async/follow-up behavior, then the privacy rule. Each sentence carries distinct, actionable information; even the endpoint mapping is a one-clause addition.

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?

With only two required parameters, an output schema present, and annotations covering the safety profile, the description supplies everything else the agent needs: why to choose this tool, that the result is deferred, and how to handle the guest in the interim.

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%, so both property_id and question are already documented, including the 500-character limit and the note that answers may be added to the FAQ. The description's only added parameter-level guidance is the 'no contact details' content rule, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 and resource (send a question to the host) and immediately scopes it: questions the property record and FAQ do not cover. An agent can distinguish this from send_message and get_property without opening any schema.

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?

Gives a clear triggering condition (only when the record and FAQ do not answer it) and two operational rules: tell the guest you will follow up, and exclude the guest's contact details. It stops short of explicitly naming the alternative routing (e.g., send_message for direct contact), so it is strong context rather than full when/when-not/alternative guidance.

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

All Threshold 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.

Resources

Need Help?