get_site_summary
Get the public Raze site summary and key URLs.
Input Schema
TableJSON Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Raze
TDQS
C2.9/5.0
Behavior2/5
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
The description implies a read-only operation but does not explicitly state behavioral traits like lack of side effects, authentication requirements, or rate limits. Since no annotations exist, the description carries full burden and falls short.
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 a single, focused sentence with no wasted words.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Completeness2/5
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Given the absence of an output schema, the description should elaborate on what the summary includes and how key URLs are structured. It is too terse to fully guide an AI agent.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Parameters3/5
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
With no parameters, the description adds minimal value beyond the tool name. It mentions 'public' and 'key URLs' but does not detail the return structure.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Purpose4/5
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description clearly states the tool retrieves a 'site summary and key URLs' with the verb 'Get'. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools which focus on bookings, projects, and resources.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Usage Guidelines2/5
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor any prerequisites or context for invocation.
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
A3.8/5.0
Disambiguation5/5
Each tool targets a distinct aspect of Raze's public information or booking functionality. There is no overlap; booking, pricing, projects, resources, and services are clearly separated.
Naming Consistency5/5
All tool names follow a consistent verb_noun pattern in snake_case (e.g., create_booking, get_available_slots, list_projects). This makes it easy for an agent to predict tool behavior.
Tool Count5/5
With 10 tools, the server covers the main public-facing aspects of Raze (booking, pricing, projects, resources, services) without being overly heavy or thin. Each tool serves a clear purpose.
Completeness5/5
The tool set provides comprehensive coverage for a company site: booking lifecycle (including slot checking and creation), pricing, project case studies (list and detail), resources, and services. No obvious gaps for the intended public interaction.