Skip to main content
Glama

Request a free human locator

request_locator_help
Idempotent

Hand the renter to Alexander, Taco Street's human locator, who confirms live pricing/availability and books tours — free to renters (properties pay locators). Follow-up arrives by TEXT or EMAIL, never a cold call. Requires the renter's real phone or email, shared with their consent. One request per renter — duplicates within 24h return the existing lead.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
cityNoMetro the renter is searching (Austin, Dallas, Houston or San Antonio).
nameNoThe renter's name, if shared.
noteNoAnything the locator should know.
agentNoName of the referring assistant/product.
contactYesThe renter's phone number or email (with their consent).
move_inNoMove-in timeline, e.g. 'November'.
bedroomsNoBedroom count the renter needs, e.g. 1BR.
budget_maxNoThe renter's max monthly rent in USD.
neighborhoodsNoNeighborhoods the renter prefers.

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
lead_idYes
messageYes
successYes
duplicateNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / city / description
      Previous value: -"Metro the renter is searching (Austin, Dallas or Houston)."New value: +"Metro the renter is searching (Austin, Dallas, Houston or San Antonio)."
  2. Changed6 schema fields changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / bedrooms / description
      Added value: +"Bedroom count the renter needs, e.g. 1BR."
    • addedInput schema / properties / budget_max / description
      Added value: +"The renter's max monthly rent in USD."
    • addedInput schema / properties / city / description
      Added value: +"Metro the renter is searching (Austin, Dallas or Houston)."
    • addedInput schema / properties / name / description
      Added value: +"The renter's name, if shared."
    • addedInput schema / properties / neighborhoods / description
      Added value: +"Neighborhoods the renter prefers."
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
      +  "additionalProperties": true,
      +  "properties": {
      +    "duplicate": {
      +      "type": "boolean"
      +    },
      +    "lead_id": {
      +      "type": "string"
      +    },
      +    "message": {
      +      "type": "string"
      +    },
      +    "success": {
      +      "type": "boolean"
      +    }
      +  },
      +  "required": [
      +    "success",
      +    "lead_id",
      +    "message"
      +  ],
      +  "type": "object"
      +}
  3. First observed

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations mark this as a non-read-only, idempotent, non-destructive, closed-world write; the description adds real context beyond that — it's free (properties pay locators), follow-up arrives by text/email rather than a cold call, and duplicate submissions within 24h return the existing lead, which directly explains the idempotentHint. Consent and real-contact requirements are also disclosed.

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?

Three tight sentences, front-loaded with the core action and actor, then funding model, contact channel, and dedup rule. Every sentence carries information the agent needs; nothing is filler.

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?

Output schema exists, so return-value detail isn't required, and the description still covers the one non-obvious return behavior (duplicate returns the existing lead). Consent requirements, cost, follow-up channel, and the actor are all addressed, leaving no gap for an agent deciding whether to call this.

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% with per-field descriptions for all nine parameters, so the baseline is 3. The description reinforces the critical 'contact' requirement (real phone or email, with consent) but adds no format or syntax detail beyond what the schema already states.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description names a concrete verb and resource — handing a renter to a named human locator who confirms live pricing/availability and books tours — so the agent knows exactly what the call accomplishes. It does not explicitly distinguish itself from the sibling ask_a_locator, which is the main thing keeping this from a 5.

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?

It gives clear usage conditions: requires the renter's real phone/email shared with consent, one request per renter, and duplicates within 24h return the existing lead. What's missing is an explicit when-not or a named alternative (e.g. ask_a_locator) for cases where a request has already been made.

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.

Resources