Retrieve a call's details by its unique ID from Follow Up Boss CRM. Use this tool to look up any call record.
Retrieve a call by id. (GET /calls/{id})
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| id | Yes | ||
| extraQuery | No | Extra raw query parameters not explicitly listed above — e.g. FUB custom field filters like custom.ClosingDate on /people or /deals. Keys and values are sent as-is. |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states a read operation ('Retrieve') without detailing any potential side effects, authentication requirements, rate limits, or error behavior. For a tool with no annotation coverage, this is a significant gap.
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?
The description is a single, front-loaded sentence with no extraneous words. It efficiently conveys the core purpose and includes the HTTP endpoint for extra context, earning a perfect score for conciseness.
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?
For a simple get-by-id operation with one required parameter, the description suffices to invoke the tool. However, without an output schema and no annotation hints, an agent lacks information about return format, error conditions, or authentication requirements. The description is adequately minimal but not complete given the absence of structured metadata.
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?
The description references the 'id' parameter ('by id') but adds no additional meaning beyond the schema. The extraQuery parameter is covered in the schema but not mentioned in the description. Given 50% schema coverage, the description does not compensate for the unaddressed parameter semantics.
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?
The description clearly states the action ('Retrieve a call') and the resource ('by id'). It is unambiguous and distinguishes from other get tools by specifying 'call'. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from similar list or search tools, though the intent is obvious.
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?
The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like list_calls or update_call. It lacks any mention of prerequisites, context, or conditions that would help an agent decide between this and other call-related operations.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.