Skip to main content
Glama

ikeytz – Schlüsseldienst Ludwigsburg

Get Serp Snippet

get_serp_snippet
Read-only

WHAT: Slice of /llms-serp.txt around the first occurrence of the target URL (title/description/URL rows). path or url required in practice. If path is not http(s), it is turned into www(locale, path). No match → serp_not_found. RETURNS matchContext (~200 chars before + 400 after). Not a Google API.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
urlNoIf this starts with http, it is used as the search needle instead of path.
pathNoSite path (/preise) or used with locale to build the www URL to find in llms-serp.txt.
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.
matchContextNoSurrounding SERP lines

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, and the description adds valuable behavioral detail: it searches the first occurrence, returns matchContext with approximate character counts, returns serp_not_found on no match, and describes path-to-www conversion. This goes well beyond the annotation and is not contradicted.

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 description is compact, front-loaded with WHAT, and uses clear labels such as RETURNS and 'Not a Google API.' Every clause earns its place, with no filler or repetition.

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?

Given the read-only annotation, full schema coverage, and presence of an output schema, the description covers the essential invocation details: required parameter combination, locale behavior, failure return, and output format. An agent has enough context to call it correctly.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

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 adds extra meaning by stating that path or url is required in practice, explaining how non-http(s) paths are turned into www(locale, path), and clarifying that url can serve as the search needle. This is useful beyond the schema.

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 a specific verb and resource: it returns a slice of /llms-serp.txt around the first occurrence of a target URL, including title/description/URL rows. It also explicitly disambiguates from a Google API, making the tool's scope clear.

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 gives practical guidance like 'path or url required in practice' and a negative exclusion ('Not a Google API'), so usage is partly implied. However, it never names alternative sibling tools or explains when to prefer this over related tools like get_llms_txt or get_sitemap_txt.

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

Try in Browser

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