Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
warp-mcp

warp-mcp

by Ringer
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

List trunk endpoints

trunk_list_endpoints
Read-onlyIdempotent

Lists dispatcher endpoints (SIP destinations) for a given trunk, revealing where WARP delivers calls. Provide the trunk ID to retrieve all associated endpoints.

Instructions

List the dispatcher endpoints (SIP destinations WARP delivers calls to) for an owned trunk. Use trunk_list first to find the trunk id. Errors: NO_ACTIVE_CUSTOMER, INVALID_ID, NOT_FOUND, INTERNAL_ERROR.

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": {
      "trunk_id": "<trunk_id>"
    },
    "name": "trunk_list_endpoints"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
trunk_idYesTrunk group UUID (find it with trunk_list)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.2

TDQS

A4.7/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already mark it as read-only and idempotent. Description adds error codes, which is helpful. No contradictions.

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: first states purpose, second adds prerequisite and error list. No unnecessary words.

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?

Covers purpose, prerequisite, and errors. Could optionally mention return format, but not necessary given simplicity and lack of output schema.

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

Parameters5/5

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

Only one parameter (trunk_id) with schema description stating it's a UUID found via trunk_list. The tool description reinforces this. Schema coverage is 100%.

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 clearly states the tool lists dispatcher endpoints for a trunk, with a specific verb ('List') and resource. It distinguishes from siblings like trunk_get_endpoint and trunk_list.

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?

Explicitly says to use trunk_list first to find the trunk id. Lists common errors. Could explicitly contrast with trunk_get_endpoint, but the guidance is clear.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools