Skip to main content
Glama

a2a2p — Agent-to-Agent-to-Physical

by com.a2a2p

get_supply_options

Instant, synchronous pricing and lead time for a physical requirement — nothing is submitted or stored. Returns a deterministic parametric estimate (source="estimate", pricing_kind="model_estimate", clearly labeled, never presented as a quote). The protocol separately labels provider_estimate and provider_quote; public provider routing is not active. An explicit specification.assembly with two or more parts returns decomposition_required before file inspection or pricing; submit each fabricated part separately. Covers CNC machining, sheet metal, 3D printing, casting, injection molding, and extrusion. ATTACH AN STL in specification.design_files and a2a2p measures the mesh directly — true volume, surface area, bounding box — which replaces guesswork with measurement and returns manufacturability findings only geometry reveals. Otherwise supply intent.geometric_envelope (bounding box in mm), quantity, and material. Use this to answer "what will this cost and how long will it take?" inside a single session, before committing to a full resolution report.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
intentNoLayer 1 — the problem. What the physical matter needs to DO. Use this for intent-driven requests where the agent describes purpose and a2a2p recommends solutions.
contactNoOptional email or callback endpoint for quote delivery.
deadlineNoRequired delivery date or timeframe. Maps to intent.timeline.
quantityNoNumber of units needed. Maps to intent.quantity.
budget_usdNoApproximate budget in USD. Maps to intent.budget_envelope.
constraintsNoHard constraints: tolerances, certifications, materials to avoid, size/weight limits. Maps to intent.functional_requirements.
requirementNoPlain-language description of the physical need. Maps to intent.purpose. Include function, dimensions, materials, load/performance requirements, environment, and interfaces where known.
callback_urlNoOptional HTTPS URL. When the quote is ready, a2a2p POSTs it as JSON to this URL.
specificationNoLayer 2 — the solution. What the physical matter IS. Populate what is known. Precise specifications produce faster, tighter quotes. Controlled vocabularies are preferred but open values are accepted.
business_contextNoOptional business requirements (expected volumes, cost targets, ROI constraints). If provided, the quote includes a business case.
rejected_alternativesNoOptions already considered and ruled out. Prevents re-suggesting and builds the learning corpus.

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It is highly transparent: nothing is submitted or stored, responses are deterministic parametric estimates with explicit source and pricing_kind labels, assemblies trigger decomposition_required, and STL geometry is measured directly rather than guessed.

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?

The description is dense but not bloated. Each sentence carries distinct information: sync behavior, estimate labeling, process coverage, assembly caveat, geometry measurement, and primary use case. It could be cleaner with bullet or shorter clauses, but it remains appropriately front-loaded with the core purpose first.

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 no output schema, the description does explain what kind of result to expect (deterministic estmate with source and pricing_kind labels) and covers key behavioral edge cases like assemblies and missing geometry. It does not specify the exact response shape or failure modes beyond decomposition_required, so it is not fully complete but is strong for a tool of this complexity.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds meaningful cross-parameter guidance beyond the schema: STL files in specification.design_files are measured by a2a2p, explicit multi-part assemblies should be submitted per fabricated part, and fallback inputs are intent.geometric_envelope, quantity, and material.

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 specific verb and resource: "Instant, synchronous pricing and lead time for a physical requirement." It also distinguishes itself from sister flows by noting it is a labeled model estimate, never a provider quote, and explicitly contrasts with committing to a full resolution report.

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 gives clear usage context: "Use this to answer 'what will this cost and how long will it take?' inside a single session, before committing to a full resolution report." It also explains assembly decomposition behavior and recommended inputs, but it does not explicitly name which sibling tool to prefer when provider routing becomes active.

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

All a2a2p — Agent-to-Agent-to-Physical toolsInspect
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

A3.8/5.0
Disambiguation2/5

Multiple tool clusters have near-identical names and responsibilities: prepare_derived_beam_simulation, prepare_reviewed_beam_simulation, and prepare_simulation_study all produce bounded simulation studies, while the validate_* family has five variants with subtle input differences. The descriptions are detailed, but an agent would frequently need to read an entire paragraph to avoid misselection.

Naming Consistency5/5

All 24 tools follow the same snake_case verb_noun pattern: build_, check_, request_, validate_, prepare_, run_, upload_, etc. There are no camelCase names, no vague single-word tools, and no stylistic outliers.

Tool Count3/5

24 tools is at the heavy end of the calibration range, and a large subset of rectangular-beam preparation/validation tools could be consolidated. The broad physical-request and supplier pipeline justifies some of the count, but the overall surface still feels over-scoped.

Completeness4/5

The core workflows are covered: upload, submit, revise, status, spec review, pricing/estimates, quote-job polling, supplier package/email rendering, and a full bounded simulation loop. Missing cancellation, request listing, and actual supplier send/order actions are real but peripheral gaps rather than workflow-killing dead ends.

Resources