Skip to main content
Glama

ワットク（Wattoku）

by io.github.yhagiwara-meliorra
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

申込リンク発行

get_switch_link
Idempotent

選んだプランの申込ページへのリンクを発行します。電気・都市ガス・光回線・携帯・ホームルーターに対応しています。申込手続きはユーザー本人がリンク先の事業者サイトで行ってください（当サービスは申込の代行は行いません）。

※試算は概算です。燃料費調整額・使用状況・割引適用条件により実際の料金と異なる場合があります。最終的な料金・契約条件は必ず各社公式サイトでご確認ください。本サービスはアフィリエイトプログラムにより電力会社等から報酬を受け取ることがあります。

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
slugNoelectric 以外で必須。mobile はキャリアのslug、hikari はプランのslug、gas は事業者のslug、home_wifi は商品のslug（各検索ツールの戻り値に含まれる）
plan_idNoelectric のときは必須（search_plans が返すプランID）。gas のときは任意で、区域限定の窓口がある場合に指定する
categoryNo申込リンクを発行するカテゴリ。省略時は electric（電気）。mobile=携帯、hikari=光回線、gas=都市ガス、home_wifi=工事不要のホームルーターelectric
campaign_idNohikari のみ。申込窓口（campaign）を指定すると、その窓口の条件で送客する

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed5 schema fields changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / campaign_id
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "hikari のみ。申込窓口（campaign）を指定すると、その窓口の条件で送客する",
+  "format": "uuid",
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / category
      Added value: +{
+  "default": "electric",
+  "description": "申込リンクを発行するカテゴリ。省略時は electric（電気）。mobile=携帯、hikari=光回線、gas=都市ガス、home_wifi=工事不要のホームルーター",
+  "enum": [
+    "electric",
+    "mobile",
+    "hikari",
+    "gas",
+    "home_wifi"
+  ],
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • changedInput schema / properties / plan_id / description
      Previous value: -"申込リンクを発行するプランID"New value: +"electric のときは必須（search_plans が返すプランID）。gas のときは任意で、区域限定の窓口がある場合に指定する"
    • addedInput schema / properties / slug
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "electric 以外で必須。mobile はキャリアのslug、hikari はプランのslug、gas は事業者のslug、home_wifi は商品のslug（各検索ツールの戻り値に含まれる）",
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • removedInput schema / required
      Removed value: -[
-  "plan_id"
-]
  2. First observed

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

The description adds context that the service does not handle applications and includes an affiliate disclosure, which is useful beyond annotations. However, it does not describe behavioral traits like side effects, link validity, or whether the call creates a tracking event, despite annotations indicating non-read-only and idempotent behavior.

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?

The first sentence is front-loaded with the core purpose, followed by category support and user responsibility. The disclaimer section is somewhat verbose but provides necessary legal context, so it is mostly concise with minor extras.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

There is no output schema, and the description implies the output is a link but does not specify format or structure. It also does not clarify that slug is required for non-electric categories (though the schema does). For a simple link generator, it is adequate but has gaps in return value and exact invocation requirements.

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 each parameter (slug, plan_id, category, campaign_id) already has a detailed description. The tool description adds no additional parameter semantics, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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?

The description clearly states the tool's action: 'Issues a link to the application page for the selected plan' with a specific verb (発行) and resource. It also enumerates the supported categories, distinguishing it from sibling search/compare/simulate tools.

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?

The description implies the tool is used after plan selection ('選んだプラン') and clarifies that the user must apply themselves, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives or mention any exclusions. The context is clear but not fully specified.

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

All ワットク（Wattoku） toolsInspect
Try in Browser
RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources