Tulsa Weld Guy — book mobile welding in Tulsa

Request mobile welding (free callback)

request_service

Book mobile welding in the Tulsa area for a real person who asked for it, with their consent. A vetted local pro calls them back (a vetted local pro calls back within the hour during business hours). Free to the homeowner. Returns a reference and what happens next. Check the ZIP with check_service_area first if unsure.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "name": "<name>",
      "phone": "<phone>",
      "zip": "<zip>",
      "need": "<need>"
    },
    "name": "request_service"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`zip`	Yes	5-digit ZIP where the work is
`name`	Yes	The person's real name
`need`	Yes	What they need (e.g. trailer or trailer hitch; gate or fence repair; farm or heavy equipment)
`email`	No	Email (optional, recommended)
`phone`	Yes	US phone number the pro should call (10 digits, any punctuation)
`language`	No	Preferred language (optional; English and Spanish are standard)
`preferred_time`	No	When they prefer a call or visit (optional)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedOct 21, 2026

TDQS

A4.2/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations declare a non-read-only, non-idempotent, open-world call, and the description adds genuinely useful behavior: free to the homeowner, callback within the hour during business hours, and that a reference plus next steps are returned. It does not cover duplicate-submission behavior or what happens outside business hours, and the callback SLA is stated twice, slightly diluting the added value.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Front-loaded and generally tight, but the callback promise is duplicated almost verbatim in a redundant parenthetical, which is pure waste. The remaining sentences each contribute (consent, cost, return value, sibling check).

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?

For a 7-parameter mutation with no output schema, the description covers cost, response expectations (a reference and next steps), consent requirements, and area validation. Missing only edge behavior such as out-of-area handling or duplicate requests, which the sibling check partially mitigates.

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 all seven parameters are already documented in the schema; the description adds only implicit guidance that zip must fall in the service area. Baseline 3 applies since the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 and resource ("Book mobile welding") plus a geographic scope ("Tulsa area") and audience constraint ("a real person who asked for it, with their consent"). It also names the sibling tool to consult for area validation, so the agent can separate it from check_service_area and get_service_info without opening schemas.

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?

Gives explicit preconditions (the person actually asked for it, with consent) and an explicit alternative path ("Check the ZIP with check_service_area first if unsure"). The agent knows both when to call this and when to route elsewhere first.

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

All Tulsa Weld Guy — book mobile welding in Tulsa tools Inspect

Try in Browser

One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources

Need Help?