Skip to main content
Glama

ListHub – Japan B2B Sales List Quotes

見積りページの URL

get_order_url
Read-onlyIdempotent

その条件の見積りページ(購入の手続きができるページ)の URL を返します。件数は数えません。

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "get_order_url"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
withNoこの項目がある会社だけに絞る。email=メールアドレス、form=お問い合わせフォームURL、president=代表者名、established=設立年、capital=資本金、employees=従業員数、sales=売上高。空なら絞らない(メール・フォームが無い会社も含む)。
areasNosearch_areas の候補の id。例:["北海道:札幌市"]、["北海道"]、全国なら ["all"]。複数選ぶと合計。
industriesNosearch_industries の候補の id。例:["big:飲食店"]、["mid:飲食店:居酒屋"]、["kw:ラーメン店"]。空なら全業種。

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
okYes
errorNo
labelNo
messageNo
order_urlNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=false, so safety behavior is covered. The description adds that the returned page supports purchase and that no counting occurs, but it does not add URL validity, auth, rate-limit, or freshness details; output values are covered by the output schema.

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?

Two short sentences, with the purpose front-loaded and no wasted wording. The non-counting note is compact and materially useful.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given full parameter documentation, existing annotations, and an output schema, the description is sufficient for correct invocation. The main minor gap is sibling routing, since it does not explain when to prefer get_quote.

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 description coverage is 100%, so each parameter is already well documented. The description refers only to 「その条件」 and adds no extra meaning, defaults, or filtering semantics beyond the schema.

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 states a specific verb and resource: it returns the URL of the quote page for the specified conditions, and it notes that the page allows purchase procedures. It distinguishes from counting tools with 「件数は数えません」, but it does not explicitly differentiate from the sibling get_quote.

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?

Usage is implied: get a purchasable quote-page URL under the given filters. The note that it does not count results implicitly rules out counting use, but there is no explicit when-to-use guidance versus get_quote or the search_* helpers.

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