Skip to main content
Glama

HomeMaster

by co.homemaster
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Check whether HomeMaster covers an address

check_area
Read-onlyIdempotent

Check whether a service is available at a Singapore postal code, before looking for times. Coverage depends on which of our people or partners work near the address.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
serviceYesRequired: the code of the service the customer asked for, from find_services (e.g. cleaning, aircon, sofa_cleaning). cleaning = home cleaning by the hour, general housekeeping only: a deep clean, a spring clean, a move-out clean or one item cleaned is its own service. Every other service is booked by the job: give job_type and unit_count from its card.
postal_codeYes6-digit Singapore postal code, e.g. 238823.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / service / description
      Previous value: -"Required: the service the customer asked for, from find_services. This tool checks a service booked online, one that find_services lists under services: cleaning = home cleaning by the hour (general housekeeping only; a deep clean, spring clean or move-out clean is a different service, under more_services). aircon = aircon servicing, checked here only while find_services lists it under services; while it is under more_services this tool answers with how it is booked."New value: +"Required: the code of the service the customer asked for, from find_services (e.g. cleaning, aircon, sofa_cleaning). cleaning = home cleaning by the hour, general housekeeping only: a deep clean, a spring clean, a move-out clean or one item cleaned is its own service. Every other service is booked by the job: give job_type and unit_count from its card."
    • removedInput schema / properties / service / enum
      Removed value: -[
-  "cleaning",
-  "aircon"
-]
  2. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / service / description
      Previous value: -"Required: the service the customer asked for, from find_services. cleaning = home cleaning by the hour (general housekeeping only); aircon = aircon servicing, priced per job and number of units."New value: +"Required: the service the customer asked for, from find_services. This tool checks a service booked online, one that find_services lists under services: cleaning = home cleaning by the hour (general housekeeping only; a deep clean, spring clean or move-out clean is a different service, under more_services). aircon = aircon servicing, checked here only while find_services lists it under services; while it is under more_services this tool answers with how it is booked."
  3. Changed3 schema fields changed
    • removedInput schema / properties / service / default
      Removed value: -"cleaning"
    • changedInput schema / properties / service / description
      Previous value: -"cleaning = home cleaning by the hour; aircon = aircon servicing, priced per job and number of units."New value: +"Required: the service the customer asked for, from find_services. cleaning = home cleaning by the hour (general housekeeping only); aircon = aircon servicing, priced per job and number of units."
    • changedInput schema / required
      Previous value: -[
-  "postal_code"
-]New value: +[
+  "postal_code",
+  "service"
+]
  4. First observed

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive, closed-world, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuine non-obvious context: results depend on which staff or partners work near the address, explaining why identical inputs in nearby areas can differ. It doesn't describe the shape of the response, but that gap is minor for a boolean-style check.

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?

Two short sentences, zero filler, and the core action is front-loaded in the first clause. The second sentence earns its place by explaining why coverage varies.

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?

For a two-parameter, read-only lookup with no output schema, the description covers what the tool does and when to call it relative to find_times. It does not say what the agent should do when coverage is false, which is a small gap in an otherwise complete definition.

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%, and the schema itself is unusually rich (service codes originate from find_services, job_type/unit_count rules, postal code pattern). The description adds no parameter detail beyond the elevated schema baseline, so 3 is the correct ceiling here.

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 states a precise verb+resource (check service availability at a Singapore postal code) and adds the crucial scope qualifier that coverage is geographic/partner-dependent. Combined with the 'before looking for times' clause, an agent can distinguish this from find_times without opening either schema.

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?

It gives clear sequencing guidance ('before looking for times'), which effectively positions this as a prerequisite step ahead of find_times. It stops short of explicitly naming alternatives or stating when-not to use it (e.g. what to do when coverage fails), so it falls below a full 5.

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

All HomeMaster toolsInspect
Try in Browser
One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources