calltouch-mcp

get_sources

Retrieve traffic sources data including channels, campaigns, and call effectiveness for a given date range.

Instructions

Источники трафика: каналы, кампании, эффективность по звонкам.

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_sources"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`date_from`	Yes	Дата начала в формате dd/MM/yyyy
`date_to`	Yes	Дата окончания в формате dd/MM/yyyy

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.2.0May 30, 2026

TDQS

C2.5/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

No annotations exist, so the description must carry the burden of behavioral disclosure. It only implies a date range filter but does not state if the operation is read-only, what data is returned, or any side effects. This is insufficient for agents to understand the tool's behavior.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is concise (one sentence) but too brief to be adequately informative. It is not verbose, but the lack of structure (e.g., no separation of purpose, input, output) reduces clarity.

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 the absence of output schema and annotations, the description should provide more context about return values or aggregation details. It only mentions channels, campaigns, and call efficiency without explaining the format or completeness of data.

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 100% with descriptions for both parameters, so the baseline is 3. The tool description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema; it repeats 'date from' and 'date to' indirectly via context but does not enhance understanding.

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

Purpose3/5

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

The description states 'Traffic sources: channels, campaigns, call efficiency,' which indicates the tool deals with traffic source data but lacks a specific verb or clear resource. It does not specify whether it lists sources or aggregates metrics, making the purpose vague rather than precise.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus siblings like 'skill_sources' or 'get_statistics'. There are no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use instructions.

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

Deploy Server