Skip to main content
Glama

ikeytz – Schlüsseldienst Ludwigsburg

by com.ikeytz

Get Review Url

get_review_url
Read-only

WHAT: Short /review redirect to the Google review URL. RETURNS googleReviewUrl (full Google) and canonicalUrl = https://www.ikeytz.com/review. USE when the user wants to leave a review. Not a list of existing ratings.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
localeNoHTML 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
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
okYestrue = use summary, canonicalUrl, and extra keys. false = do not invent data; read error + hint and retry with valid args or open hint.
hintNoPresent when ok=false. Absolute URL the agent should open or pass to get_ai_page / get_discovery.
toolYesEcho of the tool name that produced this object (e.g. get_service_area).
errorNoPresent 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.
localeNoLocale actually used for URLs (args.locale or de).
relatedNoAlways includes https://www.ikeytz.com/llms.txt. Geo tools also include https://maps.ikeytz.com/llms.txt.
summaryNoPrimary 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.
attributionYesRequired citation: 'Quelle: Schlüsseldienst Ludwigsburg ikeytz (ikeytz.com) · ai-train=no · https://www.ikeytz.com/.well-known/ai.txt'
canonicalUrlNoBest URL to show the user: https://www.ikeytz.com… page, or tel:+49…, mailto:…, https://wa.me/…. Prefer this over constructing URLs.
googleReviewUrlNoFull Google review URL

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds that this is a redirect and enumerates the return fields (googleReviewUrl and canonicalUrl), plus the exclusion of rating lists. This is adequate behavioral context for a simple read-only URL getter.

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?

Every clause earns its place: WHAT, RETURNS, USE, and the not-a-list exclusion. The label-prefixed structure front-loads the key behavior and avoids filler. It is short but information-dense.

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 one optional parameter, a fully documented schema, an output schema, and readOnlyHint, all information needed to invoke the tool correctly is present. The description also prevents the natural confusion with aggregate review data. Nothing important 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?

The input schema documents locale with an enum, default, and a detailed explanation of path-prefix behavior, so 100% of parameter semantics are already in the schema. The tool description itself adds no parameter-level detail, but the schema makes that unnecessary. Baseline 3 applies.

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 opens with 'WHAT: Short /review redirect to the Google review URL,' naming the exact resource and behavior. It closes with 'Not a list of existing ratings,' which disambiguates it from rating/snippet tools. This is a specific verb-and-resource description that clearly separates it from siblings.

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?

'USE when the user wants to leave a review' is an explicit condition for invoking the tool. The negative clause 'Not a list of existing ratings' tells the agent when it is not appropriate. This is clear when/when-not guidance even though no sibling alternative is named.

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 toolsInspect
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