renovation_faqAnswer Chicago-area home-renovation questions from The Renovation Room's fact-checked FAQ: building permits and inspections, hiring and vetting contractors, remodel costs (including current tariff impacts), and project planning. Every answer cites its primary source.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| question | Yes | The renovation question, in plain language. |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, openWorldHint=true, and destructiveHint=false. The description adds useful behavioral detail by noting that answers are fact-checked, drawn from a specific FAQ, and cite their primary source, which helps the agent set user expectations about answer quality and citations.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is two sentences with no wasted words. The first sentence front-loads action, scope, and topics; the second adds the citation behavior. It avoids repeating schema or annotation information.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
For a simple read-only Q&A tool with one documented parameter and no output schema, the description covers purpose, scope, topic areas, and answer behavior. An agent has enough information to invoke the tool correctly and understand what kind of response to expect.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
The schema has 100% coverage for the single 'question' parameter, so the baseline is already strong. The description adds meaningful domain context by enumerating the types of renovation questions the tool can handle, helping the agent decide whether a user's question fits within scope.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description states a specific verb ('Answer') and resource ('fact-checked FAQ'), and scopes the tool to Chicago-area home-renovation questions with concrete topic examples. This clearly differentiates it from siblings like get_pro and search_pros, which are about finding professionals.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The description makes the intended context clear: use this tool for renovation questions in the listed FAQ topics, such as permits, contractors, costs, and planning. It does not explicitly say when not to use it or name alternative sibling tools, but the topic scope strongly implies the boundary.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Each tool has a clearly distinct role: search_pros finds contractors, get_pro retrieves one full listing, renovation_faq answers informational questions, and how_to_submit_project vs start_project are explicitly differentiated as general guidance versus an actionable prefilled link. No two tools appear to do the same thing.
Most tools follow a clear verb_noun snake_case pattern (search_pros, get_pro, start_project), while renovation_faq and how_to_submit_project are resource-style names. The naming is still highly readable and consistent in casing, but not every tool follows the verb_noun convention.
Five tools is well-scoped for a renovation directory assistant: contractor search, detail lookup, FAQ, process explanation, and project-start action. Each tool earns its place with no redundancy or bloat.
The core user journeys are covered: discovering and inspecting contractors, getting answers about permits/costs/hiring, and starting a project quote request. The handoff to the homeowner for final submission is intentional, so there are no obvious dead ends or missing critical operations.