Delco Plumber Now

request_contact

Destructive

Send Delco Plumber Now a request to contact the person about a plumbing problem in Delaware County, PA: their phone number and/or email, the problem and their town. Use only after the person has explicitly agreed to the consent text and provided their own details. Side effects: stores the request, emails Delco Plumber Now, and emails the person a confirmation if they gave an email; Delco Plumber Now may call them back (it texts only people who text it first). Not idempotent; limited to 3 requests per phone or email per day.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "consent": "<consent>",
      "problem": "<problem>",
      "location": "<location>"
    },
    "name": "request_contact"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`name`	No	Optional first name
`email`	No	Email address (phone or email is required)
`phone`	No	US phone number (phone or email is required)
`consent`	Yes	Must be true, meaning the person agreed to: "I ask Delco Plumber Now (Andrew Furman, Aifurman LLC) to contact me about this plumbing request at the phone number and/or email I provided."
`problem`	Yes	The plumbing problem in plain words
`location`	Yes	Town or ZIP in Delaware County, PA
`preferred_contact`	No	How they prefer to hear back; text needs a phone number

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed5 schema fields changedOct 23, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / email / description

Added value: +"Email address (phone or email is required)"

addedInput schema / properties / name / description
```
Added value: +"Optional first name"
```

changedInput schema / properties / phone / description

Previous value: -"US phone number"New value: +"US phone number (phone or email is required)"

addedInput schema / properties / preferred_contact / description

Added value: +"How they prefer to hear back; text needs a phone number"

addedInput schema / properties / problem / description

Added value: +"The plumbing problem in plain words"

First observedOct 22, 2026

TDQS

A4.1/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Goes well beyond the annotations by enumerating every side effect: the request is stored, the business is emailed, the person receives a confirmation email only if they supplied an email, and the business may call back but only texts people who texted first. It also flags non-idempotency and a per-day rate limit, which the annotations only hint at via idempotentHint=false.

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?

Purpose and location are front-loaded, followed by the consent precondition, then side effects and limits in a tight sequence with no filler. The side-effect sentence is long but each clause carries distinct operational information.

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 non-idempotent, open-world write tool with no output schema, the description covers preconditions, side effects, and throttling thoroughly. The one remaining gap is what the caller gets back on success or failure (e.g., a request ID or error when the daily limit is hit), which an agent must discover empirically.

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 baseline is 3; the description's restatement of 'their phone number and/or email, the problem and their town' duplicates what the schema already documents. It adds mild reinforcement of the consent requirement but says nothing about the optional name or preferred_contact parameters.

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

Purpose4/5

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

States a concrete verb and outcome ('Send ... a request to contact the person about a plumbing problem') and pins the service area to Delaware County, PA. It is clearly distinguishable from read-only siblings like check_coverage or get_price_range, though it never names or contrasts the closest sibling, chat_with_delco_plumber_now.

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?

Gives a hard precondition ('Use only after the person has explicitly agreed to the consent text and provided their own details') plus a rate ceiling of 3 per phone/email per day, which is exactly the gating an agent needs before calling. It stops short of naming an alternative path (e.g., live chat) for cases where consent has not been given.

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

All Delco Plumber Now 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?