Skip to main content
Glama

MCP Market Russia

by io.github.devids77

request_quote

Send a quote request to a construction company on behalf of the user. Returns confirmation with lead ID and company contact details.

Args: company_id: Target company UUID (required) project_id: Specific project UUID if the user is interested in a particular house project name: Client's name for the quote request phone: Client's phone number for callback email: Client's email address comment: Additional comments or requirements for the quote

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameNo
emailNo
phoneNo
commentNo
company_idYes
project_idNo

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

No annotations provided, so the description carries the burden. It discloses return values ('confirmation with lead ID and company contact details'), which adds behavioral context. However, it does not mention side effects, permissions, or error conditions.

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 brief (2 sentences) followed by a parameter list. It is efficiently structured but includes some redundant wording ('for the quote request', 'for callback'). Still, it earns its place with no wasted space.

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?

Given the presence of an output schema and 6 parameters, the description provides parameter semantics and basic behavioral context. However, it lacks usage guidelines and could mention prerequisites or typical use cases.

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

Parameters5/5

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

Schema coverage is 0%, but the description provides explicit parameter descriptions (e.g., 'company_id: Target company UUID (required)', 'project_id: Specific project UUID if the user is interested in a particular house project'). This adds meaning beyond the schema defaults.

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 clearly states 'Send a quote request to a construction company on behalf of the user.' This provides a specific verb (send) and resource (quote request), and distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_lead_status or calculate_cost.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives or provide exclusions. The usage is implied but lacks guidance on scenarios or comparisons with sibling tools.

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

All MCP Market Russia toolsInspect
Try in Browser
RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

B3.4/5.0
Disambiguation2/5

Multiple tools have overlapping purposes: search_companies, find_best_companies, smart_match, and contractor_recommendation all find contractors; get_company, company_portfolio, and company_deep_profile all return company details; calculate_cost and project_estimator both estimate costs. This makes it difficult for an agent to reliably choose the correct tool.

Naming Consistency3/5

Tool names mix verb-first patterns (get_*, search_*, compare_*, calculate_*, export_*, find_*, request_*) with noun-first patterns (company_deep_profile, market_report, price_comparison, etc.). All names use snake_case, but the inconsistent verb/noun placement makes the set less predictable.

Tool Count3/5

24 tools falls squarely in the 16-25 'feel heavy' range. While the server covers a broad domain (companies, projects, analytics, leads, estimation), the presence of many overlapping tools suggests the count could be consolidated without losing functionality.

Completeness4/5

The toolset covers the core domain well: searching companies and projects, retrieving full details, comparing entities, estimating costs, obtaining market analytics, and managing the lead lifecycle (request_quote -> get_lead_status). Minor gaps exist (e.g., no detailed per-review text, but that is explicitly stated as unavailable), but there are no dead ends for typical workflows.

Resources