nmlp_get_business_card
Get NMLP's canonical business entity card — address, phone, services, area served, languages.
Input Schema
TableJSON Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
New Mexico Literacy Project
TDQS
A3.6/5.0
Behavior2/5
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden. It only indicates a read operation ("get") and lists return fields. It does not disclose any potential side effects, auth requirements, or rate limits, leaving the agent with minimal behavioral context.
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?
The description is a single, well-structured sentence that efficiently conveys the tool's purpose and return content. Every word adds value, achieving maximum conciseness.
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 the tool has no parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description adequately covers what the tool returns. However, it could mention that the result is a single card (canonical) and hint at no side effects. Overall, it is sufficient for a simple retrieval tool.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Parameters4/5
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
The input schema is empty (0 parameters, 100% coverage), so the description need not explain parameters. The baseline for no parameters is 4, and the description appropriately reflects that no inputs are needed.
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 retrieves NMLP's canonical business entity card with specific fields (address, phone, services, area served, languages). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like nmlp_cd_lookup or nmlp_check_coverage, 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 Guidelines2/5
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
No guidance is given on when to use this tool versus alternatives. While the tool's simplicity reduces ambiguity, the presence of many sibling tools would benefit from explicit context on when to call get_business_card versus other lookups.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Try in Browser
Glama MCP Gateway
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
TDQS
A3.9/5.0
Disambiguation5/5
Each tool has a clearly distinct purpose, from specific identifier lookups (CD, vinyl, LCCN) to donation logistics and first-edition identification. The general resolver (nmlp_resolve) is complementary and well-differentiated.
Naming Consistency5/5
All tools follow a consistent pattern: 'nmlp_' prefix with descriptive snake_case names (e.g., nmlp_check_coverage, nmlp_identify_first_edition). There is no mixing of conventions.
Tool Count4/5
At 16 tools, the count is slightly above the ideal 3-15 range, but each tool serves a non-trivial and distinct function across book identification, media lookup, and donation management, justifying the number.
Completeness4/5
The server covers core identification workflows (first editions, number lines, publisher rules, various identifiers) and donation operations, but lacks appraisal/pricing tools and more granular donation status tracking, which are minor gaps.