GeezerKeeper Referral Exit Routes and Deadlines

Choose the smallest GeezerKeeper workflow

choose_private_workflow

Read-onlyIdempotent

Choose the free, $19 consumer, or $59 professional option using only recipient count and intended use. No personal information is accepted.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`recipientCount`	Yes	Number of identifiable organizations to track
`professionalUse`	No	True for a practice, firm, or senior living location sharing handouts or tracking referral chronology and deadlines

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`reason`	Yes
`alternatives`	Yes
`dataHandling`	Yes
`nextActionUrl`	Yes
`recommendation`	Yes
`userFacingSummary`	Yes

TDQS

A4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the agent knows it's a safe read operation. The description adds the behavioral constraint 'No personal information is accepted,' which is valuable beyond the annotations and signals input restrictions.

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?

One efficient sentence conveying the core function and a key constraint. No redundancy; title and description are both concise.

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 simple selection tool with two params and an output schema, the description is sufficient. It doesn't spell out return values, but the output schema covers that. Slight gap: doesn't explain what the chosen workflow entails, but not necessary for invocation.

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 coverage is 100%, with clear descriptions for recipientCount and professionalUse. The description's phrase 'using only recipient count and intended use' loosely maps to the schema but adds no new details beyond what's already in the parameter descriptions.

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 clearly states 'Choose the free, $19 consumer, or $59 professional option' which identifies the tool's function as selecting a plan/workflow. The title 'Choose the smallest GeezerKeeper workflow' adds specificity. This distinguishes it from sibling tools which are all get/lookup operations.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description implies usage for selecting among pricing tiers based on recipientCount and professionalUse, but doesn't explicitly state when to use it versus the sibling lookup tools. No exclusions or alternative recommendations are provided, so guidance is only implied.

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

All GeezerKeeper Referral Exit Routes and Deadlines tools Inspect

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

A4.2/5.0

Disambiguation4/5

Most tools have clearly distinct purposes: get_info, get_location, get_services, lookup_deadline, lookup_exit_route, choose_workflow, and template retrieval are all separate concerns. However, get_info and get_services both touch on pricing/options, which could cause slight confusion.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tool names follow a consistent verb_noun pattern in snake_case (get_*, lookup_*, choose_*). The verbs are semantically appropriate, and the style is uniform throughout, making the set predictable.

Tool Count5/5

With 7 tools, the set is well-scoped for a niche informational server focused on referral exit routes and deadlines. Each tool covers a distinct aspect, and the count does not feel excessive or sparse.

Completeness4/5

The toolset covers key information retrieval (business info, services, location), lookup of deadlines and exit routes, and workflow selection. A minor gap is the lack of a tool to list all supported networks, which would improve discoverability, but agents can work around this.

Resources

Need Help?