Get one published public adjuster by its slug.
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": {
"slug": "<slug>"
},
"name": "get_listing"
}
}| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| slug | Yes | The listing slug. |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, and non-destructive behavior, so the safety profile is covered. The description's only added behavioral signal is 'published', implying unpublished/draft listings are not retrievable — useful, but thin, and it says nothing about error behavior for missing slugs.
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?
One short sentence, front-loaded with the verb and resource, with zero filler. Nothing in the sentence is redundant or padded.
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?
With no output schema, the description would ideally hint at what a returned listing contains, and it does not. Still, for a single-record fetch whose annotations already carry the safety profile, the definition is adequate to invoke the tool correctly.
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?
Schema description coverage is 100% and there is a single parameter fully documented with pattern and length constraints, so the baseline of 3 applies. The phrase 'by its slug' merely restates what the schema already supplies, adding no format or example detail.
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?
States a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('one published public adjuster') plus the lookup key ('by its slug'), so the operation is unambiguous. However, it never distinguishes itself from the sibling 'search_listings', which an agent could easily confuse with a single-item fetch.
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?
Usage is implied rather than stated: fetching a single record when you already hold its slug is the obvious reading. There is no explicit 'use this instead of search_listings when...' routing, and no mention of what happens when the slug is unknown or the listing is unpublished.
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.