Retrieve detailed profile information for a specific service provider including license status, reviews, and service history.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| provider_id | Yes | Unique identifier of the provider to look up |
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?
With no annotations provided, the description carries the transparency burden. The verb 'retrieve' conveys a read-only intent, and the description lists what data is included, but it does not disclose potential errors, authentication requirements, or return format. For a simple read operation, 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.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is a single, front-loaded sentence that efficiently communicates the tool's purpose and includes relevant details without redundancy. Every word contributes value.
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?
Given the tool's simplicity (one parameter, no output schema, no annotations), the description adequately covers the core behavior and the content of the profile. It could mention handling of non-existent providers or response structure, but for a basic lookup, this is nearly complete.
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?
The input schema already fully describes the single parameter with 100% coverage, and the description adds no additional meaning about the parameter beyond what is in the schema. Baseline 3 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 clearly states the action (retrieve) and the specific resource (detailed profile information for a service provider), and enumerates distinguishing content (license status, reviews, service history). This differentiates it from sibling tools like home_profile or job_history, which likely have different scopes.
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?
No guidance is provided about when to use this tool compared to alternatives such as service_search or home_profile. It implicitly signals usage for profile lookups but does not state exclusions or mention sibling tools.
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.
Each tool targets a distinct resource and action: home profile management, job history retrieval, provider profile viewing, and service provider search. No overlap exists between their purposes.
All tool names are lowercase snake_case compounds, but the pattern is not uniform: home_profile, job_history, and provider_profile are noun_noun, while service_search is noun_verb. This minor deviation is still predictable and readable.
With 4 tools, the server is tightly scoped to a home services domain, covering both user-facing and provider-facing operations without unnecessary bloat.
The core workflows (searching providers, viewing provider details, accessing user home/job history) are covered. However, missing actions like booking a service or submitting a review represent minor gaps.