get_business
Get the full public card of one business by its slug (from search results or a laspi.pro/b/{slug} URL): description, services, contacts, languages.
Input Schema
TableJSON Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| slug | Yes | Business slug |
Laspi Business Directory
by pro.laspi
TDQS
A4.3/5.0
Behavior4/5
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description adds value by specifying return content (description, services, contacts, languages) and source of slug, though does not explicitly state read-only nature or auth requirements. Still, it's adequate for a simple retrieval tool.
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?
Single concise sentence that is front-loaded with the core action and includes all essential details without any unnecessary words.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Completeness5/5
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Given no output schema, the description adequately explains what is returned (description, services, contacts, languages). For a simple one-parameter retrieval tool, it is complete and informative.
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?
Schema already describes the slug parameter with 100% coverage. Description adds context on where the slug originates (search results or URL), providing meaning beyond the schema.
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 uses specific verb and resource ('Get the full public card of one business'), lists content types, and distinguishes from siblings by focusing on a single business lookup via slug.
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?
Clearly states the tool retrieves a business card by slug, implying usage when slug is available, but lacks explicit when-not-to-use or comparison with sibling tools ask_directory and search_businesses.
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
A4/5.0
Disambiguation5/5
Each tool has a clear, distinct purpose: ask_directory for natural language queries about customer needs, search_businesses for keyword-based search, and get_business for retrieving full details by slug. No overlap.
Naming Consistency5/5
All tools use a consistent verb_noun pattern in snake_case (ask_directory, get_business, search_businesses), making them predictable and easy to understand.
Tool Count4/5
With 3 tools, the server is lean but covers the core operations for a business directory: search, ask, and retrieve details. While minimal, it is appropriate for the domain and avoids unnecessary complexity.
Completeness4/5
The tool set covers search, natural language query, and detail retrieval. Minor gaps exist (e.g., no explicit filtering by category), but the tools are well-designed to handle common workflows and can work around limitations via the query parameter.