BidBud Estimating

Compare quality tiers

compare_tiers

Read-onlyIdempotent

Price the same project at economy, mid-range and premium quality side by side.

When to use: the homeowner asks "what's the difference between a basic and a
high-end job?" or wants to choose a budget level.
Limits: US residential homes only; tiers reflect typical materials and labor
at each level, not specific products or brands; planning estimates, not bids.

Args:
    home_sqft: Finished square footage of the home (200-20000).
    num_rooms: Number of rooms (1-50).
    services: Services to price, e.g. ["flooring", "painting"].
    zip_code: 5-digit US ZIP code of the property, for regional labor pricing.
    state: Two-letter state code, used when the ZIP is unknown.
    stories: Above-grade stories (1, 1.5, 2 or 3; default 1).
    flooring_type: For flooring only: carpet, tile, vinyl, hardwood or mix.
    num_windows: For windows only: actual window count, if known.
    include_permits: Add estimated permit fees.
    include_contingency: Add a 10% contingency allowance.

Returns the total for each tier, a per-service breakdown for each tier, and
each service's totals across the three tiers.

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`state`	No
`stories`	No
`services`	Yes
`zip_code`	No
`home_sqft`	Yes
`num_rooms`	Yes
`num_windows`	No
`flooring_type`	No
`include_permits`	No
`include_contingency`	No

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedOct 18, 2026

TDQS

A4.6/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds real value beyond that: it clarifies that tiers reflect typical materials and labor rather than specific products, and that results are planning estimates, not bids — setting expectations about precision that annotations cannot convey.

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?

Structure is front-loaded and purposeful: one-line purpose, then when-to-use, limits, args, returns. Every section earns its place for a ten-parameter tool, and no sentence is redundant filler.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

An output schema exists, yet the description still briefly orients the agent to the return shape (per-tier totals, per-service breakdown, cross-tier totals) without over-explaining. Combined with the limits section and full parameter documentation, an agent has everything needed to call this correctly.

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

Parameters5/5

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

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description carries the full documentation burden, and it does: it lists all ten parameters with meaningful constraints (sqft 200-20000, rooms 1-50, 5-digit ZIP, 1/1.5/2/3 stories), notes conditional applicability (flooring_type only for flooring, num_windows only for windows), and explains fallback semantics (state used when ZIP is unknown) plus the 10% contingency value.

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 opening line names a specific verb and resource ('Price the same project at economy, mid-range and premium quality side by side'), which is immediately distinguishable from a single-project sibling like estimate_project. An agent can tell this is the multi-tier comparison tool without opening the 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?

The 'When to use' block gives a concrete trigger ('what's the difference between a basic and a high-end job?') and the 'Limits' block scopes applicability to US residential homes and planning estimates rather than bids. It does not name a sibling alternative such as estimate_project for single-scenario pricing, so routing against siblings is left partly to inference.

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

All BidBud Estimating tools Inspect

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

Need Help?