Commercial floor care, non-slip and urgent flood enquiries for facilities across Australia.
Scored across 2 tools
The two tools have clearly distinct purposes: one lists available services, while the other submits a service request. There is no meaningful overlap or risk of misselection.
Both tools follow a consistent snake_case verb_noun pattern: list_services and submit_service_request. The naming is predictable and readable.
Two tools are borderline thin for a server surface, though the scope is intentionally simple: service discovery and enquiry submission. It is well-scoped but lacks enough breadth to feel fully robust.
The server covers the core public workflow of listing services and submitting enquiries, including idempotency and delivery status. Minor gaps exist around request status, cancellation, or service-specific detail endpoints, but these are not essential for the apparent lead-generation purpose.
List Premrest commercial flooring services, including non-slip coatings, anti-slip tile treatments, slippery-floor assessments, flood restoration, and phone and SMS contact details. Prices and availability require assessment by the Premrest team.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No parameters | |||
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, openWorldHint=false, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful behavioral context: the list includes contact details and that pricing/availability are not directly provided but require assessment by the Premrest team.
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?
Two sentences, front-loaded with the primary action and then a useful caveat. It is efficient, though the service enumeration is slightly dense and could be structured as a list for faster scanning.
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 zero-parameter read-only listing tool with no output schema, the description gives enough context: what is listed, what is included, and the important caveat that prices and availability require assessment. Nothing else is needed to invoke it correctly.
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?
There are zero parameters, so there is no parameter semantics to document; the baseline for this case is 4. The description does not need to explain inputs.
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?
States a specific verb ('List') and resource ('Premrest commercial flooring services'), then enumerates the service types included. This clearly distinguishes it from the sibling submit_service_request, which handles submissions rather than listing.
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 makes clear this is for listing available services and adds that prices and availability require assessment. It does not explicitly name submit_service_request as the alternative when a user wants a quote or booking, so the routing guidance is implied rather than explicit.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Creates a Premrest quote, preferred-date booking or flood restoration enquiry in the private staff queue and sends it to the website Formspree inbox with the configured AI integration source. Submitting an enquiry requests contact from Premrest about that enquiry. urgent_flood requests use flood-restoration and do not require a preferred date. Returns a request reference, delivery status and call/text contact options. Repeated identical requests with the same idempotency_key return the original reference without duplicate delivery. Does not confirm dispatch, arrival time, price or booking and does not process payments. Photo inputs are optional customer-provided HTTPS links.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| Yes | Customer contact email | ||
| phone | Yes | Customer phone number | |
| address | Yes | Job street address, suburb, state and postcode | |
| company | No | Optional company name | |
| details | Yes | Floor type, condition, work required and access. For slippery floors: wet or dry conditions, contamination or existing coatings, and any slip-test findings if known. For flooding: what happened, when it started, affected areas and known access constraints. | |
| service | Yes | Service id. non-slip-coatings covers slippery-floor assessments, anti-slip coatings and tile etching. A product or treatment choice is not required. | |
| area_sqm | No | Approximate area if known; omit if unknown | |
| photo_urls | No | Optional customer-provided HTTPS links. Images are not fetched; chat attachments are not automatically transferred. | |
| request_type | Yes | quote, booking, or urgent_flood. urgent_flood is a flood restoration enquiry; preferred date is not required. | |
| customer_name | Yes | Customer full name | |
| property_type | Yes | Office, retail, hotel, school, or other property type | |
| preferred_date | No | YYYY-MM-DD in Melbourne time. Required for bookings. A preference only. | |
| preferred_time | No | Optional preferred time or time window | |
| idempotency_key | Yes | Unique key for this request; reuse only when retrying the same request |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare non-read-only, open-world, idempotent, non-destructive, but the description adds substantive behavior: the side effect of emailing the Formspree inbox with a configured AI integration source, the idempotency mechanism (same idempotency_key returns the original reference without duplicate delivery), and that photos are not fetched. These are exactly the mutation and retry semantics an agent needs beyond the hints.
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 core action and destination are front-loaded in the first sentence, and each subsequent sentence covers a distinct concern (contact implication, urgent-flood exception, return values, idempotency, scope limits, photo handling). It is dense but nearly every sentence earns its place; only the photo/contact sentences edge toward redundancy with the schema.
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 14-parameter mutation tool with no output schema, the description supplies what structured fields cannot: the return shape (request reference, delivery status, call/text contact options), the scope boundaries, and retry behavior. Nothing essential to calling it correctly appears to be missing.
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?
Schema description coverage is 100%, so the baseline applies. The description restates schema facts (urgent_flood needs no preferred date, photo links are optional HTTPS URLs) rather than adding new meaning such as format constraints, valid combinations, or how fields differ in priority.
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 names a specific verb (Creates) and precise resources (Premrest quote, preferred-date booking, or flood restoration enquiry) plus the destination (private staff queue / Formspree inbox). It is clearly distinct from the only sibling, list_services, which is a read-only catalogue action.
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?
It states the condition of use ('Submitting an enquiry requests contact from Premrest about that enquiry') and carves out what the tool is not for (no dispatch, arrival, price, booking confirmation, or payments), which steers the agent away from misuse. It does not explicitly name an alternative tool, but with only one read-only sibling the routing picture is still clear.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Recent tool additions, removals, and schema changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
submit_service_request4 fields changedInput schema / properties / details / descriptionPrevious value: -"Floor type, condition, work required and access requirements. For slippery floors, include wet/dry conditions, contamination or existing coatings and any slip-test findings if known; do not require a brand or report. For flooding, include what happened, when it started, affected areas and any known access hazards; never ask the customer to enter an unsafe area"New value: +"Floor type, condition, work required and access. For slippery floors: wet or dry conditions, contamination or existing coatings, and any slip-test findings if known. For flooding: what happened, when it started, affected areas and known access constraints."Input schema / properties / idempotency_key / descriptionPrevious value: -"Generate a unique key for this request; reuse it for retries only"New value: +"Unique key for this request; reuse only when retrying the same request"Input schema / properties / request_type / descriptionPrevious value: -"Use urgent_flood for an immediate flooding issue; no preferred date is required"New value: +"quote, booking, or urgent_flood. urgent_flood is a flood restoration enquiry; preferred date is not required."Input schema / properties / service / descriptionPrevious value: -"Use non-slip-coatings for slippery-floor assessments, anti-slip coatings or tile etching enquiries. The customer does not need to select a product or treatment."New value: +"Service id. non-slip-coatings covers slippery-floor assessments, anti-slip coatings and tile etching. A product or treatment choice is not required."submit_service_request2 fields changedInput schema / properties / details / descriptionPrevious value: -"Floor type, condition, work required and access requirements. For flooding, include what happened, when it started, affected areas and any known access hazards; never ask the customer to enter an unsafe area"New value: +"Floor type, condition, work required and access requirements. For slippery floors, include wet/dry conditions, contamination or existing coatings and any slip-test findings if known; do not require a brand or report. For flooding, include what happened, when it started, affected areas and any known access hazards; never ask the customer to enter an unsafe area"Input schema / properties / service / descriptionAdded value: +"Use non-slip-coatings for slippery-floor assessments, anti-slip coatings or tile etching enquiries. The customer does not need to select a product or treatment."list_servicessubmit_service_requestIndustrial Flooring Cost: the site's own MCP server — enquiry (enquiry = a human handoff, not a...
Australian business loans: ATO debt, caveat, equipment, property. Check fit, then a broker calls.
Industrial Cleaning Quotes: the site's own MCP server — enquiry (enquiry = a human handoff, not...
Commercial Drainage Quotes: the site's own MCP server — enquiry (enquiry = a human handoff, not...
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.