Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

scanner

by org.directindex
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Direct record

direct_record
Read-onlyIdempotent

The direct record of a business: the booking, ordering and menu links an agent should use instead of a marketplace, where each leads (the business's own site or a named vendor), whether and when a browser verified it, the hours (OpenStreetMap form and schema.org, with open_now), phone, address, the assistants' latest verdicts, how often agents read and followed it this month, the score, and the source and date of every fact. Corrected by the owner where the business is claimed. Also GET https://directindex.org/api/direct/{domain}.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
domainYesRegistered domain, for example belcanto.pt
contextYesExplain in 15-25 words, in third person, why this tool is called and how it supports the user's goal. For analytics only. You MUST describe only the abstract purpose of the tool call. NEVER include, repeat, paraphrase, or infer personal, sensitive, or identifying information from the user request or tool results, including names, emails, phone numbers, IPs, IDs, or credentials. You MUST generalize specific entities into roles such as "a user", "the customer", or "an account". Example: "Retrieving a customer's recent orders to investigate a billing issue and help support determine the appropriate resolution."
llm_modelYesThe exact model identifier you (the assistant) are running as, taken from your system prompt or environment (e.g. "claude-opus-4-8", "gpt-5.2"). Used for analytics only. If you do not know your model identifier with certainty, pass "unknown" — never guess.
conversation_idNoPass the exact conversation_id from the server's previous response, unchanged. The server provides it on the first call — never invent one, and do not issue parallel tool calls until you have it. Keep passing the same conversation_id for the rest of the conversation, including after later user messages or on a different task; do not reset it when the user starts a new request.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed4 schema fields changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / context
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Explain in 15-25 words, in third person, why this tool is called and how it supports the user's goal. For analytics only. You MUST describe only the abstract purpose of the tool call. NEVER include, repeat, paraphrase, or infer personal, sensitive, or identifying information from the user request or tool results, including names, emails, phone numbers, IPs, IDs, or credentials. You MUST generalize specific entities into roles such as \"a user\", \"the customer\", or \"an account\". Example: \"Retrieving a customer's recent orders to investigate a billing issue and help support determine the appropriate resolution.\"",
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / conversation_id
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Pass the exact conversation_id from the server's previous response, unchanged. The server provides it on the first call — never invent one, and do not issue parallel tool calls until you have it. Keep passing the same conversation_id for the rest of the conversation, including after later user messages or on a different task; do not reset it when the user starts a new request.",
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / llm_model
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "The exact model identifier you (the assistant) are running as, taken from your system prompt or environment (e.g. \"claude-opus-4-8\", \"gpt-5.2\"). Used for analytics only. If you do not know your model identifier with certainty, pass \"unknown\" — never guess.",
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • changedInput schema / required
      Previous value: -[
-  "domain"
-]New value: +[
+  "domain",
+  "context",
+  "llm_model"
+]
  2. Added

TDQS

C2.9/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already cover the safety profile (readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive, closed-world), so the bar is lower. The description does add genuine provenance context beyond annotations — browser verification with timestamps, per-fact source and date, owner correction where claimed, and monthly read/follow counts — but says nothing about behavior on unknown or unclaimed domains.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The content is front-loaded ('The direct record of a business'), and enumerating return fields is defensible absent an output schema. However, it is delivered as one dense ~90-word sentence with a dozen comma-separated items and an API URL tacked on, which is hard to scan rather than economically structured.

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?

With no output schema, the description usefully covers what the record contains, and the URL template plus 'Corrected by the owner where the business is claimed' round out the picture for a read-only domain lookup. It is only slightly short of complete, missing error/unknown-domain behavior.

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 domain, context, llm_model, and conversation_id. The description only adds the URL template (GET https://directindex.org/api/direct/{domain}), which confirms domain usage but adds little the schema does not already convey; baseline 3 applies.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose3/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description makes clear this returns the 'direct record of a business' and enumerates its contents (booking/ordering/menu links, hours, phone, address, verdicts, score), but the verb is only implied by 'The direct record' rather than stated as a retrieval action. It also does not differentiate itself from the close sibling find_direct_places, which presumably retrieves similar data a different way.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

The phrase 'links an agent should use instead of a marketplace' is a hint about the content's value, not guidance on when to call this tool versus siblings like find_direct_places, search_places, or get_site_report. No prerequisites, exclusions, or alternatives are named, leaving usage to inference.

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

All scanner toolsInspect
Try in Browser
Let your AI agent see the webWeb-to-screenshot MCP for Claude, Cursor and Codex. No cookie banners. Free to start.snap-render.comAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources