Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
SetLuca

SetLuca

Official
by setluca
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

Replace a call summary

luca_call_events_summary_replace
Destructive

Replace the generated summary with the coach's own wording and push it. A summary already in the CRM updates that same note.

Instructions

Replace the generated summary with the coach's own wording and push it. A summary already in the CRM updates that same note.

Luca operation: PUT /api/call-events/{id}/summary Required scopes: call_events:write Required OAuth scope: luca:full; data sensitivity: full_content Requires Idempotency-Key. Provide idempotencyKey for safe retries, or the server will generate one. Destructive: has a real-world side effect. You must pass confirm: true; the call is rejected without it. Use workspaceId or workspaceSlug to override the default workspace configured by environment.

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": {
      "id": "<id>",
      "body": "<body>"
    },
    "name": "luca_call_events_summary_replace"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYes
bodyYes
confirmNoThis tool has a real-world side effect: it messages real leads, books, moves, or cancels a call, changes a lead's consent, imports leads, writes to a connected calendar or CRM, sends workspace events to an outside URL, or re-triggers downstream automations. Pass confirm: true to proceed; the call is rejected without it.
workspaceIdNoOptional Luca workspace id override.
workspaceSlugNoOptional Luca workspace slug override.
idempotencyKeyNoStable key for safe retries. If omitted, the MCP server generates a unique key for this call.

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes
provenanceNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.4.0

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already flag destructiveHint/openWorldHint, but the description adds real value: it discloses that the summary is pushed to the CRM and that an existing CRM note is updated in place (upsert semantics), plus scope requirements (call_events:write, luca:full, full_content), the Idempotency-Key requirement with server-side fallback, and the confirm:true gate. It does not say whether a prior summary is recoverable or what happens on CRM failure.

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?

Front-loaded with purpose and the CRM-note behavior before the operational metadata block. Some duplication with the schema: the confirm requirement and idempotency-key behavior appear in both places, which is defensible as a safety restatement but costs a sentence.

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?

With an output schema present, return values need not be described, and the description covers auth scope, data sensitivity, idempotency, confirmation and workspace scoping adequately. Minor gap: no statement of reversibility or what happens to the previously generated summary after replacement.

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 coverage is 67%, and the description meaningfully explains confirm, idempotencyKey, workspaceId and workspaceSlug beyond the schema, and the path in the operation line clarifies that id is the call-event id. It adds nothing about the summary body itself (8000-char cap, required, replaces existing content) beyond the phrase 'coach's own wording'.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb (replace) and resource (generated call summary) plus the downstream effect (push to CRM). It does not, however, name the obvious neighbors (luca_call_events_summary_generate, luca_call_events_push_to_crm) so the agent must infer the boundary from wording alone.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Implicit routing is present: 'replace the generated summary with the coach's own wording' suggests use when a human has written their own summary rather than wanting one generated. But there is no explicit when-to-use, no exclusion, and no pointer to summary_generate or push_to_crm, which are directly adjacent siblings.

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