Get one published robotaxi service 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 readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the meaningful constraint that only *published* listings are retrievable, which implies drafts or unpublished slugs will not resolve — a real behavioral trait beyond the annotations.
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 with no filler, and the resource and lookup key are front-loaded. Nothing to trim.
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?
The tool is simple (one required param), and annotations cover the safety profile, but there is no output schema and the description says nothing about what a listing record contains or how a not-found/unpublished slug is reported. For a fetch-by-key tool the agent is left guessing at the failure mode.
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 coverage is 100%, and the single 'slug' parameter already carries type, pattern, length bounds, and a description. The description adds nothing about slug format or where to obtain one, so the baseline 3 for schema-covered parameters is appropriate.
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?
The description states a specific verb (Get) and resource (one published robotaxi service) plus the lookup key (slug). The phrase 'one published' implicitly separates it from search_listings and the list_* siblings, though it never names them, so it falls just short of a 5.
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: the tool fetches a single item and requires a slug, which signals a direct lookup rather than a search. However, there is no explicit when-to-use statement, no guidance on preferring search_listings when the slug is unknown, and no mention of what happens for an unpublished or missing slug.
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.