Skip to main content
Glama

The Roofing List

by io.github.redpath1
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Search contractors

search_contractors
Read-onlyIdempotent

Find roofing, siding or gutter contractors in a US city, or near a US ZIP code, from The Roofing List. Give city and state, or zip. A zip returns the nearest firms within 25 miles, nearest first. Returns only listed businesses that are open and passed our contact check. Ratings come from reviews published on The Roofing List only.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
zipNoA 5-digit US ZIP code, for example "78701". Returns the nearest firms within 25 miles, nearest first. With zip, city and state are ignored.
cityNoUS city name, for example "Austin". Give city and state, or zip.
limitNoHow many results, 1 to 25. Default 10.
stateNoUS state as a USPS code ("TX") or a full name ("Texas"). Give city and state, or zip.
tradeYesThe trade: roofing, siding or gutters.

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
contractorsYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed4 schema fields changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / city / description
      Previous value: -"US city name, for example \"Austin\"."New value: +"US city name, for example \"Austin\". Give city and state, or zip."
    • changedInput schema / properties / state / description
      Previous value: -"US state as a USPS code (\"TX\") or a full name (\"Texas\")."New value: +"US state as a USPS code (\"TX\") or a full name (\"Texas\"). Give city and state, or zip."
    • addedInput schema / properties / zip
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "A 5-digit US ZIP code, for example \"78701\". Returns the nearest firms within 25 miles, nearest first. With zip, city and state are ignored.",
+  "pattern": "^\\d{5}$",
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • changedInput schema / required
      Previous value: -[
-  "trade",
-  "city",
-  "state"
-]New value: +[
+  "trade"
+]
  2. First observed

TDQS

A3.9/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already cover read-only, idempotent, non-destructive and closed-world, so the description earns credit for adding genuine behavior: a zip search is a 25-mile radius, results are nearest-first, and only businesses that are open and have passed a contact check are returned. The note that ratings come solely from reviews published on The Roofing List is valuable provenance context an agent would otherwise assume wrong.

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?

Four sentences, front-loaded with purpose, then location rules, then result semantics and provenance. Slight redundancy with the schema on the 'give city and state, or zip' rule, but nothing is padding.

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?

An output schema exists and annotations carry the safety profile, so the description only needs to explain search behavior, which it largely does: radius, ordering, eligibility filter, and data provenance. It stops short of saying what an empty result set looks like or whether results are capped by anything other than limit, but nothing critical to a correct call is missing.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100% and already documents the zip/city/state trade-off, the ZIP pattern, and the 1-25 limit with a default of 10. The description restates the city-or-zip rule and the trade options but adds no format or precedence detail beyond the schema, so the baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb (find), the resource (roofing/siding/gutter contractors), the geographic scope (US city or ZIP), and the data source (The Roofing List). The enumerated trades and geography make it immediately distinguishable from a by-ID lookup like get_contractor.

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?

It tells the agent how to supply the location criterion ('Give city and state, or zip') and implicitly that zip takes precedence, which is useful calling guidance. However, it never addresses the sibling get_contractor or states when this tool should be preferred over a direct record lookup, so the when-versus-alternatives dimension is left to inference.

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

All The Roofing List toolsInspect
Try in Browser
One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources