PestPin

Check a pest control phone number

verify_phone

Read-onlyIdempotent

Check a pest control company's phone number against official state license records. Give it the number on the van, the flyer, the voicemail or the caller ID and it returns the license records that publish that exact number, each with the business name, license number, issuing state, the official state source link and the date PestPin last processed that source. Use it when someone has a number and wants to see which license records publish it, before they hire or let anyone in. The state lookups PestPin works with are searched by business name or license number, so a number on its own is normally a dead end; this covers 34 states. The match is exact on ten digits and never partial, so a number one digit different is a different company and is never offered. A match means a license record publishes that number: it does not say who answered, whether the caller works for that company, or anything about insurance or work quality. No match is not proof anyone is unlicensed: coverage is 34 states, about half of all listings publish no phone at all, and a licensed company can publish a number PestPin does not hold. Records from states that license the individual operator rather than a firm are never returned here, because a phone number is not a way to look up a private person; they are counted in withheld and the license-number lookup returns them. Only ever pass a business's number, never the person's own.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`businessPhone`	Yes	The pest control company's published phone number, e.g. 713-555-0100. Dashes, brackets, spaces, a leading 1 and an extension are all accepted. Never the person's own number.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`note`	Yes	The limits a reader must be told
`matches`	Yes	License records publishing that number, empty when none does
`withheld`	No	Matching records deliberately left out because that state licenses the individual operator rather than a firm. Zero when nothing was withheld.
`phoneNumber`	No	The ten digits the number was read as
`totalMatches`	Yes	How many records publish that number

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

AddedSep 8, 2026

TDQS

A4.8/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Goes well past the annotations: exact ten-digit matching with no partials, 34-state coverage, what a no-match does and does not prove, why individual-operator-state records are withheld, and the privacy constraint against passing a personal number. Annotations confirm the read-only/idempotent profile, and the description layers the substantive behavioral caveats on top.

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-loaded with the core action in the first sentence, and nearly every sentence carries operational weight. It runs long and restates the 'never the person's own number' constraint at the end, which is already implied earlier.

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?

Covers matching semantics, coverage limits, no-match interpretation, withheld-record behavior, and privacy constraints. An output schema exists, yet the description's summary of returned fields (business name, license number, state, source link, processed date) still helps frame the result.

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 coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3, but the description adds real meaning by naming the sources the number comes from (van, flyer, voicemail, caller ID) and reinforcing that it must be a published business number, not a personal one. The formatting rules themselves are already in 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?

States a specific verb (check) and resource (a pest control company's phone number) against a specific corpus (official state license records). The scope is precise enough to separate it from verify_license, which the description explicitly names as the name/license-number path.

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?

Explicitly says when to use it ('when someone has a number and wants to see which license records publish it, before they hire or let anyone in') and when alternatives apply ('state lookups are searched by business name or license number, so a number on its own is normally a dead end'). It also routes individual-operator records to the license-number lookup.

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

All PestPin 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.

Resources

Need Help?