ikeytz – Schlüsseldienst Ludwigsburg

Get Contact

get_contact

Read-only

WHAT: Public phones, fax, email, office address object. DOES NOT submit the website contact form and must not claim it did. USE to give the user a number. NEXT: compose_tel_mobile, compose_tel_landline, compose_mailto, compose_whatsapp, list_whatsapp_options.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`locale`	No	HTML locale for canonicalUrl and path prefixes. de = default, URLs have no prefix (https://www.ikeytz.com/preise). en\|fr\|ru\|fa\|ar\|tr = prefix /{locale}/ (https://www.ikeytz.com/en/preise). Omit or empty = de. Does not change prices, phone numbers, or legal German names. Not a maps.ikeytz.com locale (maps is German-only).	de

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`ok`	Yes	true = use summary, canonicalUrl, and extra keys. false = do not invent data; read error + hint and retry with valid args or open hint.
`fax`	No	Fax display.
`hint`	No	Present when ok=false. Absolute URL the agent should open or pass to get_ai_page / get_discovery.
`tool`	Yes	Echo of the tool name that produced this object (e.g. get_service_area).
`email`	No	Public info@ email.
`error`	No	Present when ok=false. Codes include: unknown_tool, unknown_place, unknown_auswahl, unknown_ratgeber, unknown_doc, unknown_discovery, faq_not_found, wissen_not_found, serp_not_found, q_required, bad_datetime, bad_when_key, plus HTTP errors from fetch.
`locale`	No	Locale actually used for URLs (args.locale or de).
`mobile`	No	Mobile display (Handy), 24/7.
`address`	No	Office postal address (no walk-in).
`related`	No	Always includes https://www.ikeytz.com/llms.txt. Geo tools also include https://maps.ikeytz.com/llms.txt.
`summary`	No	Primary text for the model. For discovery tools this is the file window (possibly thousands of characters). For list tools a compact one-liner. Quote with attribution.
`landline`	No	Landline display (Festnetz).
`attribution`	Yes	Required citation: 'Quelle: Schlüsseldienst Ludwigsburg ikeytz (ikeytz.com) · ai-train=no · https://www.ikeytz.com/.well-known/ai.txt'
`canonicalUrl`	No	Best URL to show the user: https://www.ikeytz.com… page, or tel:+49…, mailto:…, https://wa.me/…. Prefer this over constructing URLs.

TDQS

A4.7/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already signals read-only behavior, and the description adds meaningful context: the data is public, the tool has no form-submission side effect, and the agent must not claim it did. This prevents both misuse and hallucinated success.

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?

The WHAT/USE/NEXT structure is compact, scannable, and every clause carries value: the returned object, the exclusion, the intended use, and follow-up tools. There is no filler or redundancy.

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?

For a one-optional-parameter read-only tool with an output schema, the description covers the essential context: what is returned, what is not done, when to use it, and what to do next. Nothing needed to call it correctly is missing.

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%, and the single optional locale parameter is already fully documented in the schema with defaults, URL-prefix behavior, and scope limitations. The description does not add parameter-level detail, but it does not need to because the schema is complete.

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 exactly what is returned: a public contact object containing phones, fax, email, and office address. It also distinguishes the tool from the website contact form and from the compose/list siblings, so an agent can tell it apart without inspecting schemas.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

It gives an explicit use case ('USE to give the user a number'), an explicit non-use ('DOES NOT submit the website contact form and must not claim it did'), and lists relevant NEXT alternatives. This is clear routing guidance rather than a generic statement.

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

All ikeytz – Schlüsseldienst Ludwigsburg 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

A3.9/5.0

Disambiguation3/5

Many tools have clearly distinct roles, but there is real overlap: get_discovery duplicates get_llms_txt/get_llms_mcp_server/get_sitemap_txt, get_it and get_mcp_hub describe the same machines, and get_page_summary is a stub that competes with get_ai_page/get_serp_snippet. The detailed descriptions help, but an agent could still misselect among the discovery and pointer tools.

Naming Consistency4/5

The overwhelming majority follow a consistent snake_case verb-noun pattern: get_*, list_*, compose_*, resolve_*. Minor deviations like site_overview, get_it, and find_by_keyword are readable but break the dominant convention.

Tool Count2/5

45 tools for a single small-business website is excessive and well above the 25+ threshold. Many tools are pointer/list aliases or discovery-file accessors that could be consolidated without losing capability.

Completeness4/5

Core workflows are well covered: identity, contact, emergency info, pricing, invoicing, service areas, FAQs, legal pages, and generic page content via get_ai_page. Minor gaps exist around explicit opening-hours details, existing customer reviews, and maps-domain functionality, but these are mostly declared out of scope rather than dead ends.

Resources

Need Help?