Toolzy MCP Serverofficial
A
licenseNot graded
qualityB
maintenanceEnables AI assistants to search, view details, and check availability of tool rental listings from Toolzy's peer-to-peer marketplace.
MIT
toolzy
by io.toolzy
Server Details
Recherche et location d'outils entre particuliers en France via Toolzy.
If you are the author of this connector, you can claim ownership with GitHub, an HTTP challenge, or a DNS record. Claimed connector authors can inspect health checks, view analytics, and manage their listing.
- Status
- Healthy
- Last Tested
- Transport
- Streamable HTTP
- URL
Available Tools
3 toolscheck_availabilityVérifier la disponibilitéAInspect
Vérifie si un outil est disponible pour des dates données et calcule le prix total. Utilisez ce tool quand l'utilisateur demande la disponibilité, veut savoir le prix pour une période, ou demande 'est-ce disponible ce weekend ?'.
ParametersJSON Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| end_date | Yes | Date de fin (YYYY-MM-DD) | |
| tool_url | Yes | URL de l'annonce Toolzy (ex: https://www.toolzy.io/listings/perceuse-makita) | |
| start_date | Yes | Date de début (YYYY-MM-DD) |
TDQS
A3.7/5.0
Behavior2/5
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description must cover behavioral traits. It only states the tool checks availability and calculates price, but omits any side effects, permissions, or what 'available' means (e.g., return format). Lacks depth.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Conciseness5/5
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Two sentences, each serving a distinct purpose: stating function and providing usage examples. No redundancy or filler.
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?
With no output schema, the description should hint at return values. It does not. Three parameters are simple and all required, but the description is adequate for a basic tool, leaving some gaps.
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 covers all three parameters with descriptions. The description does not add extra meaning beyond the schema, so 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?
The description clearly states it checks availability for given dates and calculates total price. It distinguishes from sibling tools (get_tool_details, search_tools) which serve different purposes.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Usage Guidelines4/5
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
Provides explicit use cases (availability queries, price inquiries, 'is it available this weekend?'). Does not mention when NOT to use, but the examples are clear.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
get_tool_detailsDétails d'un outilAInspect
Récupère les informations détaillées d'un outil sur Toolzy : prix, caractéristiques, photos. Utilisez ce tool quand l'utilisateur veut en savoir plus sur un outil spécifique après avoir vu les résultats de recherche. Renvoie aussi similar_tools : des alternatives de la même catégorie dans un rayon de 20 km avec leur distance — à proposer si l'outil est jugé trop cher ou trop loin.
ParametersJSON Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| tool_url | Yes | URL de l'annonce Toolzy (ex: https://www.toolzy.io/listings/perceuse-makita) |
TDQS
A4.2/5.0
Behavior4/5
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses what is returned (price, features, photos) and the similar_tools behavior, including distance within 20 km and a usage policy (suggest if too expensive or too far). It could cover error cases, but for a simple detail-lookup tool this is transparent.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Conciseness5/5
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Two sentences, fully front-loaded with purpose and usage. Every clause adds value, including the similar_tools guidance. Zero redundancy and appropriately sized for the tool's complexity.
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?
The tool has one parameter, no output schema, and no annotations. The description adequately covers the return values and usage context. It is nearly complete, though it does not mention behavior when no similar tools exist or if the URL is invalid.
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%, with tool_url already documented including an example URL. The description does not add parameter-level semantics beyond the schema, so the baseline score of 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?
The description states a specific verb+resource: 'Récupère les informations détaillées d'un outil sur Toolzy' with clear scope (prix, caractéristiques, photos). It distinguishes from siblings by implying search_tools is for finding tools and positioning this tool as the follow-up for a specific tool.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Usage Guidelines4/5
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
It explicitly says when to use the tool: 'quand l'utilisateur veut en savoir plus sur un outil spécifique après avoir vu les résultats de recherche.' This gives clear context but does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusion scenarios, which keeps it a step below a perfect score.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
search_toolsRechercher des outilsAInspect
Recherche d'outils et équipements disponibles à la location sur Toolzy. Utilisez ce tool quand l'utilisateur cherche un outil, veut louer du matériel, ou demande ce qui est disponible près de chez lui (ex: 'perceuse à Bordeaux', 'tondeuse à gazon', 'outils de bricolage'). La recherche couvre la commune demandée PUIS les communes voisines dans un rayon de 15 km : chaque résultat porte is_local et distance_km, et search_area donne la répartition. Indiquez toujours à l'utilisateur ce qui est dans sa ville et ce qui est à côté, avec la distance.
ParametersJSON Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| city | No | Ville de recherche. Les communes voisines sont incluses automatiquement. | |
| limit | No | Nombre max de résultats (défaut: 10, max: 20) | |
| query | No | Recherche textuelle (nom d'outil, marque, type) | |
| country | No | Marché à interroger, pour lever une ambiguïté de commune homonyme (ex: Bruges). | |
| zipcode | No | Code postal (filtre par préfixe) | |
| category | No | Catégorie d'outils | |
| coaching | No | Filtrer sur accompagnement disponible | |
| delivery | No | Filtrer sur livraison disponible | |
| price_max | No | Prix maximum par jour en euros | |
| radius_km | No | Rayon autour de la ville en km (défaut: 15). N'élargissez que si l'utilisateur accepte de se déplacer plus loin. |
TDQS
A4.3/5.0
Behavior4/5
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses important behavioral traits: search first covers the requested commune then neighboring communes within 15 km, each result includes `is_local` and `distance_km`, and `search_area` shows the breakdown. It also gives a user-communication mandate, adding value beyond the schema, though it does not detail sorting, pagination, or exact result shape.
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 description is four sentences and each one adds value: defining the search scope, giving user-intent triggers, explaining geographic behavior, and instructing the assistant on how to present results. It is slightly long but remains focused and front-loaded with the core purpose.
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?
Given 10 parameters and no output schema, the description provides crucial runtime behavior (radius expansion, result fields) and user-facing guidance. It does not fully specify the response structure beyond `is_local`, `distance_km`, and `search_area`, but it is sufficient for an agent to select and invoke the tool correctly in most cases.
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 structured schema already documents all 10 parameters. The description adds little new parameter-level information; it restates the radius default and expansion behavior, but the schema already covers those details. The description does not meaningfully compensate beyond what the schema provides.
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 opens with a specific verb+resource: "Recherche d'outils et équipements disponibles à la location sur Toolzy," clearly stating the tool searches for rentable tools/equipment. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools (check_availability, get_tool_details) by being the search/query entry point with examples like "perceuse à Bordeaux".
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?
Explicit usage guidance is provided: "Utilisez ce tool quand l'utilisateur cherche un outil, veut louer du matériel, ou demande ce qui est disponible près de chez lui" with concrete examples. It also explains the search radius behavior and instructs the agent to always tell the user what is local vs. nearby, which is actionable context.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Frequently Asked Questions
Claiming proves that you control a remote MCP connector. It does not move, proxy, or interrupt the server.
Open the connector listing, choose Claim ownership, and sign in to Glama.
Complete one verification method:
GitHub identity — fastest for official registry listings. For a namespace such as
io.github.alice/server, link the matching GitHub user or an account that owns the GitHub organization, then choose Claim with GitHub.HTTP challenge — works when you can deploy a public file. Generate a token, publish the exact JSON Glama shows at
/.well-known/glama.jsonon the same origin as the connector, then choose Check HTTP challenge.DNS challenge — works when you control DNS but cannot change the server. Generate a token, create the exact TXT record Glama shows, wait for it to propagate, then choose Check DNS challenge.
After verification, Glama sends a confirmation email and gives you access to listing details, thumbnails, health checks, and analytics. Keep the HTTP file or DNS record in place: Glama periodically checks it and ownership remains verified while the token is discoverable.
The HTTP ownership file has this structure:
{
"$schema": "https://glama.ai/mcp/schemas/connector.json",
"claim": "glama_claim_..."
}Claim tokens are opaque, stable, and bound to the signed-in Glama account. They contain no email address or other personal information. If Glama can no longer discover a verified HTTP or DNS token, it starts a seven-day grace period before removing claim-based access. Restore the same token during that period to keep ownership verified. Never publish an email address, Glama session token, GitHub token, or connector credential as ownership proof.
If verification fails, confirm that you copied the current token exactly. The HTTP file must be public, return valid JSON with a successful HTTP response, and stay on the connector's origin. DNS changes may need more time to propagate. A claim cannot transfer to a different origin or hostname: if the connector target changes, Glama starts the grace period and the new target must be claimed separately after the previous claim is released.
For a connector linked to the official MCP Registry, registry updates continue to replace its name, description, and URL by default. After claiming, open Manage connector and enable Use Glama listing details as the source of truth if edits made on Glama should be preserved. Categories and thumbnails are always managed on Glama; registry linkage and technical connection settings continue to sync.
Control your server's listing on Glama, including description and metadata
Access analytics and receive server usage reports
Get monitoring and health status updates for your server
Feature your server to boost visibility and reach more users
To improve your MCP server's ranking:
Claim ownership of the server listing
Complete the server profile with an accurate description and thumbnail
Provide a test profile so Glama can connect to and evaluate the server
Keep tool definitions clear and complete to earn a high Tool Definition Quality Score (TDQS)
Route real usage through the Glama Gateway; more recorded successful server uses also improve the ranking
For users:
Full audit trail – every tool call is logged with inputs and outputs for compliance and debugging
Granular tool control – enable or disable individual tools per connector to limit what your AI agents can do
Centralized credential management – store and rotate API keys and OAuth tokens in one place
Change alerts – get notified when a connector changes its schema, adds or removes tools, or updates tool definitions, so nothing breaks silently
For server owners:
Proven adoption – public usage metrics on your listing show real-world traction and build trust with prospective users
Tool-level analytics – see which tools are being used most, helping you prioritize development and documentation
Direct user feedback – users can report issues and suggest improvements through the listing, giving you a channel you would not have otherwise
The connector status is unhealthy when Glama is unable to successfully connect to the server. This can happen for several reasons:
The server is experiencing an outage
The URL of the server is wrong
Credentials required to access the server are missing or invalid
If you are the owner of this MCP connector and would like to make modifications to the listing, including providing test credentials for accessing the server, please contact support@glama.ai.
Discussions
No comments yet. Be the first to start the discussion!
Related MCP Connectors
French rental tools: create & e-sign a lease, rent control, IRL, deposit, receipts (France).
Search and book local services in France: real availability, quotes, consented one-tap bookings.
Find French tradespeople, plan multi-trade projects, submit moderated contacts, create profiles.
Create and track quote requests to local French tradespeople (80 trades) on fixou.fr.
Related MCP Servers
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityCmaintenanceEnables users to find and contact building tradespeople in France, and lets independent tradespeople create free profiles.Apache 2.0
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityBmaintenanceEnables AI agents to access French residential rental tools including lease creation and e-signing, rent control checks, rent revision, and document generation.MIT
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityCmaintenanceEnables AI assistants to search and consult Leboncoin classified ads through the MCP protocol, with tools for ad search, detail retrieval, user profiles, and category/region listings.MIT
Try in Browser
Glama MCP Gateway
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
TDQS
A4.1/5.0
Disambiguation5/5
Each tool has a clearly distinct purpose: searching for tools, retrieving detailed information, and checking availability/pricing. No overlap exists between these operations.
Naming Consistency5/5
All tool names follow a consistent verb_noun pattern: check_availability, get_tool_details, search_tools. This makes the API predictable and easy to navigate.
Tool Count5/5
With only 3 tools, the server is tightly scoped to the core task of discovering and checking tool rental options. Each tool is essential and earns its place, fitting within the ideal 3-15 range.
Completeness3/5
The server covers the discovery and availability-checking workflow well, but lacks a booking or reservation tool, which is a notable gap for a rental platform. Users can find, inspect, and check a tool's availability, but cannot complete the rental, creating a dead end.