Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

LocalPro — Verified US Local Service Provider Data

by io.github.LocalProDev
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

search_providers

Search for verified local service providers across 10 trade categories: water damage restoration, foundation/slab repair, crawl space repair, basement waterproofing, mold/asbestos/lead remediation, radon mitigation, septic services, commercial electrical, floor coating (epoxy/polyaspartic), and laundry pickup & delivery. Returns provider name, LocalPro Rating, services offered, pricing summary, years in business, and a link to the full profile with contact details. Covers major US metro areas. Use list_niches first to get valid niche IDs, and list_service_types for valid service_type values.

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": {
      "niche_id": "<niche_id>"
    },
    "name": "search_providers"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
cityNoCity or metro area slug (e.g. "denver-co", "minneapolis-mn"). Get options from list_cities.
limitNoMax results to return (default 10)
niche_idYesNiche ID (e.g. "coated-local", "radon-local"). Get options from list_niches.
service_typeNoService type slug to filter by (e.g. "epoxy", "radon_testing"). Get valid values from list_service_types.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4.1/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

There are no annotations, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It does disclose return fields and geographic coverage, but it does not explicitly state that this is a read-only operation, how results behave when city is omitted, or any error/limit conditions. This is adequate but not rich.

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

Conciseness4/5

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

The description is front-loaded with the action and resource, then efficiently packs categories, return fields, coverage, and prerequisites into four sentences. The category list is lengthy but necessary because it defines what niche_id values are valid.

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 search tool with four parameters and no output schema, the description covers required inputs, sources for valid values, result fields, and geographic scope. It could more explicitly state when to use get_provider for full profile/contact details, but the profile link implies that next step.

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 input schema already documents all four parameters with examples and defaults, so the baseline is 3. The description adds value by listing the trade categories and explicitly directing the agent to list_niches and list_service_types for valid values, going beyond the schema's descriptions.

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 ('Search') with a clear resource ('verified local service providers') and enumerates 10 trade categories. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_provider, which fetches a single provider, and list_niches/list_service_types, which return reference data.

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 explicitly instructs the agent to use list_niches first for valid niche IDs and list_service_types for valid service_type values, giving clear prerequisite guidance. It also notes coverage of major US metro areas, but it does not explicitly say when to prefer get_provider over search_providers or state exclusions.

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

All LocalPro — Verified US Local Service Provider Data toolsInspect
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