Skip to main content
Glama

Get Business Details

get_business
Read-only

Get full details for a single business (listing) by its slug. Call this when the user asks for more information about a specific business. Use the slug from search_businesses results.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
slugYes

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the agent knows this is a safe read operation. The description adds minimal behavioral context beyond the schema, such as returning 'full details', but it does not disclose error handling, authentication requirements, or rate limits. With annotations doing the heavy lifting, a score of 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.

Conciseness5/5

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

The description is two sentences with no filler. The first sentence states the primary purpose, and the second provides usage context and slug provenance. It is well-structured and front-loaded.

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 single-parameter read-only tool with annotations and no output schema, the description covers the essential context: what it does, when to use it, and how to get the required slug. It omits error behavior (e.g., not-found handling), but that is not critical for a simple getter. Overall, it is sufficiently complete for an agent to use correctly.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The schema has one parameter (slug) with no description (0% coverage). The description compensates by explaining that the slug comes from search_businesses results, giving the agent clear guidance on how to obtain a valid value. This goes beyond the schema and is sufficient for a single parameter.

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?

The description uses a specific verb ('Get') with a clear resource ('business (listing)') and scope ('by its slug'). It distinguishes itself from sibling search tools by explicitly referencing search_businesses results, making the tool's unique role clear.

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?

The description provides clear when-to-use guidance: 'Call this when the user asks for more information about a specific business.' It also indicates the prerequisite of using a slug from search_businesses, implying that search should be used first if no slug is available. However, it does not explicitly exclude other alternatives or mention when not to use it.

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.

TDQS

A4.1/5.0
Disambiguation5/5

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.

Naming Consistency4/5

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.

Tool Count5/5

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.

Completeness5/5

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.

Resources