haus

create_appliance

Create an appliance record for the household, tracking purchase date, warranty expiry, and optional references to previously created warranty/insurance documents.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`name`	Yes	Name of the appliance, e.g. what it is or where it's located.
`brand`	No	Manufacturer or brand name.
`model`	No	Model name or number, as printed on the appliance or its manual.
`notes`	No	Freeform notes about the appliance.
`purchaseDate`	No	Date the appliance was purchased, in YYYY-MM-DD format.
`serialNumber`	No	Manufacturer serial number, used when contacting support or filing a warranty claim.
`warrantyDocumentId`	No	ID of a previously created document containing the warranty paperwork.
`warrantyExpiryDate`	No	Date the manufacturer warranty expires, in YYYY-MM-DD format. Must not be before purchaseDate.
`insuranceDocumentId`	No	ID of a previously created document containing the insurance policy.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`items`	Yes
`title`	No
`message`	No
`variant`	No

TDQS

A4.2/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already indicate a non-read-only, non-destructive operation. The description adds that warranty/insurance document references must be to previously created documents, a meaningful dependency beyond the annotations. It does not contradict any annotation.

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

Conciseness5/5

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

The description is a single, front-loaded sentence containing only essential information. It is concise, with no redundant or irrelevant details.

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?

Given the rich schema and presence of an output schema, the description covers the core purpose and the key dependency on previously created documents. It could mention explicit alternatives or edge-case constraints, but those are already captured in the schema and annotations, making it adequately complete.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema fully documents each parameter. The description only restates the purpose of a few fields (purchase date, warranty expiry, document references) without adding new syntax or constraints beyond what the schema already provides.

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

Purpose5/5

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

The description clearly states the verb 'create' and the resource 'appliance record', and specifies the key data tracked (purchase date, warranty expiry) and optional document references. This distinguishes it from other create_* sibling tools by focusing on the appliance domain.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

The description implies when to use the tool (adding a new appliance with purchase/warranty details) but does not explicitly mention alternatives like update_appliance. It provides clear context without exclusions or when-not-to-use guidance.

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

All haus tools Inspect

Try in Browser

RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A3.9/5.0

Disambiguation5/5

Each tool targets a distinct resource and action, with clear descriptions separating similar-sounding tools like create_calendar_event vs create_recurring_calendar_event. Shopping list operations (add, buy, remove, update) are clearly delineated.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tools follow a verb_noun snake_case pattern: create_*, list_*, update_*, delete_*, get_*, etc. Even special operations like store_memory, recall_memory, and skip_recommendation fit the pattern.

Tool Count1/5

With 68 tools, this server vastly exceeds a reasonable scope; the instruction manual indicates 50+ tools is an extreme mismatch. The breadth suggests the server should be split into focused sub-servers (tasks, shopping, calendar, etc.) rather than a single monolithic interface.

Completeness5/5

The tool surface covers full CRUD/lifecycle for all major resources: tasks, shopping, calendar, contacts, documents, appliances, vehicles, pets, recipes, meal plans, subscriptions, and memories. Additional features like house review, weather, and profile round out the household management domain.

Resources

Need Help?