calltouch-mcp

get_calls

Retrieve Calltouch call logs with details like phone number, source, duration, status, and UTM tags. Filter by date range, source, and paginate results.

Instructions

Список звонков Calltouch: номер, источник, длительность, статус, UTM-метки.

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": {
      "date_from": "<date_from>",
      "date_to": "<date_to>"
    },
    "name": "get_calls"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`date_from`	Yes	Дата начала в формате dd/MM/yyyy
`date_to`	Yes	Дата окончания в формате dd/MM/yyyy
`page`	No	Номер страницы (по умолчанию 1)
`limit`	No	Количество записей (по умолчанию 50)
`source`	No	Фильтр по источнику трафика

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.2.0May 30, 2026

TDQS

C2.9/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It does not disclose whether the operation is read-only, destructive, or any authorization or rate limits. Only lists output fields.

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?

A single sentence efficiently states the tool's purpose and key output fields. However, it could be more structured with separate sections.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness2/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given 5 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is too brief. It does not explain pagination, date format constraints, or how the output is structured.

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?

Input schema has 100% description coverage, so baseline is 3. The description does not add extra parameter meaning beyond field names, but the schema itself is clear.

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?

The description clearly states it lists Calltouch calls with specific fields (number, source, duration, status, UTM tags). It is specific to calls, but does not differentiate from sibling tools like get_leads or get_statistics.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention pagination, date range handling, or filters beyond the schema.

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

Deploy Server