HireLocksmiths — Locksmith Finder

request_quote

Create a lead: ask a specific locksmith for a quote.

ONLY call this when the user has chosen a provider and wants to be contacted —
it sends a real request to the locksmith. Provide a phone (preferred) or email
so the locksmith can reach the customer. Returns a reference id (HL-####); the
locksmith confirms availability, price, and ETA directly.

Args:
    locksmith_id: id from search_locksmiths / get_locksmith.
    name:         Customer name.
    phone:        Customer phone (preferred). Phone OR email is required.
    email:        Customer email (alternative to phone).
    zip:          5-digit ZIP of the job (improves routing/records).
    service:      Job type, e.g. "lockout", "automotive".
    details:      Free-text description of the job.
    urgency:      e.g. "emergency", "today".

Input Schema

Name	Required	Default
`zip`	No
`name`	Yes
`email`	No
`phone`	No
`details`	No
`service`	No	lockout
`urgency`	No
`locksmith_id`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedJul 16, 2026

TDQS

A4.5/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, openWorldHint=true, idempotentHint=false and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds real value beyond that: it sends an actual outbound request to a third party, it returns an HL-#### reference id, and price/availability/ETA are confirmed directly by the locksmith rather than by the tool. It does not warn that non-idempotent calls can create duplicate leads, which is the one notable omission.

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?

Front-loads the critical constraint (the ONLY/when-to-use warning) before the mechanics, which is the right ordering. The arg list is long but justified by 0% schema coverage; some entries ('name: Customer name') are near-tautological but harmless.

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?

With no output schema, the description still explains the return value (reference id) and what happens after the request. Annotations cover the safety profile, all 8 params are explained, and the real-world side effect is disclosed — nothing essential is missing for correct invocation.

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% and there are 8 parameters, so the description carries the full burden — and it does: it documents every arg, marks phone as preferred and states 'Phone OR email is required' (a constraint the schema does not express, since neither is in required), notes zip improves routing, and gives service examples matching the default.

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?

States a concrete verb+resource ('Create a lead: ask a specific locksmith for a quote') and frames the outcome as a lead rather than a booking, which meaningfully separates it from book_job. An agent can tell immediately this is a contact/introduction request, not a reservation.

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 an explicit, exclusive precondition: 'ONLY call this when the user has chosen a provider and wants to be contacted,' plus the reason (it sends a real request). It does not name an alternative sibling (e.g. book_job) for the case where the user has not yet chosen a provider, so routing is clear but not fully disambiguated.

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

All HireLocksmiths — Locksmith Finder 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?