list_calls
List all call records from Vapi to review history and analyze call interactions.
Instructions
Lists all Vapi calls
Input Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
List all call records from Vapi to review history and analyze call interactions.
Lists all Vapi calls
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It only states 'Lists all Vapi calls' with no details on return size, pagination, or rate limits, leaving behavioral traits unclear.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Single sentence, no unnecessary words. Could be slightly more informative without bloat, but remains concise.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Given no output schema, no parameters, and no annotations, the description is too minimal; it doesn't explain return format, pagination, or side effects for a list tool.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
No parameters in schema; schema description coverage is 100%. Description adds no extra param info but baseline for 0 params is 4, and the description is adequate.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
Description clearly states verb 'Lists' and resource 'Vapi calls', distinguishing it from siblings like get_call (single call) and list_assistants (different resource).
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
No guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives; e.g., no mention that get_call is for a specific call or that list_assistants lists different resources.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.
curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/VapiAI/mcp-server'
If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server