Get the full table of typical UK repair and servicing costs (GBP) for one car model from PriceMyRepair — every repair the price matrix covers, in one call. Use when the user asks what a particular car costs to maintain or repair in general.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| model | Yes | Car model, e.g. "Ford Focus". Use "uk-average" for a generic figure. |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It does disclose useful traits: it returns the full table, covers every repair in the price matrix, uses GBP, and is a single-call operation. However, it does not describe the output format, error behavior, or any access requirements, leaving some ambiguity for an agent.
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?
The description is two sentences with no wasted words. The primary purpose is front-loaded, and the usage guidance is included without bloat, making it easy for an agent to parse quickly.
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?
For a simple one-parameter read tool, the description covers the essential context: what data is returned, the currency/region, the scope ('every repair'), and the general use case. It does not describe the return structure, but given the low parameter complexity and the schema's completeness, this is only a minor gap.
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 the sole parameter 'model' is already well-documented with an example and the 'uk-average' special value. The description adds mild context by saying the costs are 'for one car model', but it does not meaningfully extend the parameter semantics beyond the schema.
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 clearly states a specific action ('Get the full table'), a precise resource ('typical UK repair and servicing costs (GBP) for one car model'), and a distinguishing scope ('every repair the price matrix covers, in one call'). This makes it easy to tell apart from the sibling get_repair_cost, which presumably returns a single repair cost.
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?
It explicitly says when to use the tool: 'when the user asks what a particular car costs to maintain or repair in general.' This provides clear context, though it does not explicitly name sibling tools or state when not to use it, so it falls just short of a 5.
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.
The two getter tools have a slight overlap: get_model_costs returns all repairs for a model, while get_repair_cost targets one repair on one model, so a specific repair query could be served by either. However, the descriptions give clear intended use cases, and list_models/list_repairs are completely distinct.
All tool names follow a consistent verb_noun pattern: get_model_costs, get_repair_cost, list_models, list_repairs. This makes the set predictable and easy to navigate.
Four tools is well-scoped for a read-only repair cost lookup service: two list endpoints for discovery and two get endpoints for retrieving costs. Each tool earns its place without redundancy.
The tool surface covers the full user journey: discover available models and repairs, then fetch either a comprehensive model cost table or a specific repair estimate. No obvious dead ends or missing operations exist for the stated purpose.