contact_brokerSend a contact message to a broker on Venturu by their profile slug. Requires an authenticated Venturu account. Set inquiryType to "buying" (default) for buyer representation or "selling" for seller representation. Provide the broker slug and the message to send. Use search_brokers to find broker slugs.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| slug | Yes | ||
| message | Yes | ||
| inquiryType | No | buying |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already indicate not read-only and not destructive. The description adds the need for authentication, which is a useful prerequisite. However, it doesn't describe side effects (like whether the message is actually sent outside the system), idempotency, or what happens after sending. Given the annotations cover the basic safety profile, a 3 is appropriate.
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 four sentences, each adding value: the core action, the auth requirement, the parameter options, and the pointer to search_brokers. It is front-loaded and free of filler.
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 contact-sending tool with 3 params and no output schema, the description covers purpose, usage, parameters, and how to get slugs. It lacks mention of return values or error behavior, and doesn't differentiate from sibling 'contact_seller,' but overall it's nearly complete.
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?
With 0% schema description coverage, the description fully compensates by explaining every parameter: 'slug' (broker's profile slug), 'message' (the text to send), and 'inquiryType' (with default 'buying' and meanings for 'buying' vs 'selling'). This adds significant meaning beyond the raw schema.
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 clearly states the tool's function: 'Send a contact message to a broker on Venturu by their profile slug.' This is a specific verb and resource, and the slug mechanism is mentioned. However, it does not explicitly distinguish from the sibling tool 'contact_seller,' so it's not a full 5.
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 provides clear context: it requires an authenticated account, and it instructs to use 'search_brokers' to find slugs. It also explains the two inquiryType values. However, it doesn't explicitly mention when to use this vs. 'contact_seller,' so it misses the exclusion/alternative clarity.
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 targets a distinct resource and action: brokers vs businesses, search vs get vs contact, and supporting list tools for categories and languages. No two tools have overlapping purposes, and the descriptions clearly differentiate them.
Most tools follow a consistent verb_noun pattern (contact_broker, get_business, search_brokers, list_languages). The only deviation is who_am_i, which is a common idiom for identity checks but does not follow the same pattern, making it a minor inconsistency.
With 9 tools, the set is well-scoped for a business marketplace. Each tool serves a clear purpose in the search-detail-contact workflow, and there are no redundant or unnecessary tools.
The toolkit covers the full user journey: discovering categories/languages, searching for brokers/businesses, viewing details, and contacting them. It also includes authentication verification. No obvious gaps or dead ends prevent successful completion of typical tasks.