Kolmo Construction

Permit submittal checklist

resolve_permit_submittals

Read-onlyIdempotent

Resolve the structured submittal-item set for a specific parcel + permit scope, via the unified permit-engine pipeline. Use this when you need the per-item checklist (with triggers, source citations, filler actor, gap-resolution path) — not just the rule-level summary that check_permit_requirements returns. Each set states its fidelity, which varies by city and scope: "full" (every item cites the code section, tip or City page it rests on), "min-viable", or "wa-baseline-stub". Unverified jurisdictions return no-spec.

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`scope`	Yes	Permit scope — the (project-type x work-class) identifier the provider catalogs by
`address`	Yes	Full street address — geocoded to a parcel and matched to a jurisdiction provider
`envelopeChange`	No	Project alters the building envelope (windows, doors, siding, roof). Default false. Drives WSEC triggers.
`structuralChange`	No	Project involves a structural change (header, framing, lateral). Default false. Drives several triggers.
`totalFloorAreaSqft`	No	Total floor area in sqft. Used by SEPA threshold (>=12000) and other size-based triggers.
`projectValuationUsd`	No	Project valuation in USD

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`ok`	Yes
`scope`	Yes
`totals`	No
`address`	No
`parcelId`	No
`applicable`	No
`disclaimer`	No
`permitType`	No
`attribution`	Yes
`skippedCount`	Yes
`jurisdictionId`	Yes
`jurisdictionFidelity`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed3 schema fields changedOct 23, 2026

changedOutput schema / properties / attribution / properties / citeAs / description

Previous value: -"Ready-made citation line. Use verbatim."New value: +"Citation line; use verbatim."

changedOutput schema / properties / attribution / properties / primarySource / description

Previous value: -"Present when Kolmo verified but does not author the fact — cite both."New value: +"Kolmo verified, did not author: cite both."

changedOutput schema / properties / attribution / properties / sourceUrl / description

Previous value: -"The specific page these facts render on. Link this, not the site root."New value: +"The page to link, not the site root."

Changed4 schema fields changedOct 10, 2026
- removedInput schema / $schema
```
Removed value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"
```
- removedOutput schema / $schema
```
Removed value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"
```
- removedOutput schema / additionalProperties
```
Removed value: -true
```
- removedOutput schema / properties / attribution / additionalProperties
```
Removed value: -true
```
Changed6 schema fields changedSep 3, 2026
- removedOutput schema / properties / attribution / properties / contractorLicense
```
Removed value: -{
-  "type": "string"
-}
```
- removedOutput schema / properties / attribution / properties / note
```
Removed value: -{
-  "type": "string"
-}
```
- removedOutput schema / properties / attribution / properties / organization
```
Removed value: -{
-  "type": "string"
-}
```
- removedOutput schema / properties / attribution / properties / retrievedFrom
```
Removed value: -{
-  "type": "string"
-}
```
- removedOutput schema / properties / attribution / properties / url
```
Removed value: -{
-  "type": "string"
-}
```
- changedOutput schema / properties / attribution / required
```
Previous value: -[
-  "organization",
-  "contractorLicense",
-  "url",
-  "sourceUrl",
-  "citeAs",
-  "retrievedFrom",
-  "note"
-]New value: +[
+  "sourceUrl",
+  "citeAs"
+]
```

Changed1 schema field changedAug 31, 2026

changedOutput schema / (root)

Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "$schema": "http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#",
+  "additionalProperties": true,
+  "properties": {
+    "address": {},
+    "applicable": {},
+    "attribution": {
+      "additionalProperties": true,
+      "properties": {
+        "citeAs": {
+          "description": "Ready-made citation line. Use verbatim.",
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        "contractorLicense": {
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        "note": {
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        "organization": {
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        "primarySource": {
+          "description": "Present when Kolmo verified but does not author the fact — cite both.",
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        "retrievedFrom": {
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        "sourceUrl": {
+          "description": "The specific page these facts render on. Link this, not the site root.",
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        "url": {
+          "type": "string"
+        }
+      },
+      "required": [
+        "organization",
+        "contractorLicense",
+        "url",
+        "sourceUrl",
+        "citeAs",
+        "retrievedFrom",
+        "note"
+      ],
+      "type": "object"
+    },
+    "disclaimer": {},
+    "jurisdictionFidelity": {},
+    "jurisdictionId": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "ok": {
+      "const": true,
+      "type": "boolean"
+    },
+    "parcelId": {},
+    "permitType": {},
+    "scope": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "skippedCount": {
+      "type": "number"
+    },
+    "totals": {}
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "ok",
+    "jurisdictionId",
+    "scope",
+    "skippedCount",
+    "attribution"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}

AddedMay 17, 2026

TDQS

A4.3/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already cover read-only, idempotent, non-destructive, open-world. The description adds genuinely new behavioral context: each result carries a `fidelity` tier varying by city/scope, with defined values ('full', 'min-viable', 'wa-baseline-stub'), and unverified jurisdictions return 'no-spec'. What's missing is any note on cost/latency of the pipeline or how partial coverage is signaled in the response.

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?

Front-loads the action and resource in the first clause, then the use-case contrast, then the fidelity caveat. Dense but every sentence carries information; the heavy em-dash parentheticals cost a little readability, but nothing is redundant.

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?

Output schema exists, so return structure needn't be described. The description nonetheless covers the one thing an agent must interpret post-call — what `fidelity` means and what 'no-spec' indicates — which is the right allocation of words. Remaining gap is the absence of any scoping note on partial or stale data.

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%, so the schema already documents all six parameters including triggers for envelopeChange, structuralChange, and the SEPA threshold. The description adds only the framing that 'scope' drives provider cataloging and fidelity variance, which is a marginal increment over the schema — 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 and resource: 'Resolve the structured submittal-item set for a specific parcel + permit scope,' and names the pipeline it runs through. It explicitly contrasts with the sibling check_permit_requirements, so an agent can distinguish the two without opening either schema.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Explicitly says when to use it ('when you need the per-item checklist with triggers, source citations, filler actor, gap-resolution path') and when not to ('not just the rule-level summary that check_permit_requirements returns'). The alternative tool is named and the selecting condition is stated.

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

All Kolmo Construction tools Inspect

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

Need Help?