Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
ceadigital-mcp-tools

ceadigital-mcp-tools

Official
by ceadigital
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Remote

google_maps_contact_email_scraper

Extracts business emails, phone numbers, social profiles, MX providers, and tech stack from Google Maps listings via pure HTTP.

Instructions

Extract direct business emails, phones, social profiles, Cloudflare DoH MX providers, and detected tech stack via pure HTTP. (Free 1-row preview automatic when CEA_API_KEY is unset; Apify: cea_digital/google-maps-contact-email-scraper)

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "query": "<query>"
    },
    "name": "google_maps_contact_email_scraper"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
queryYesPrimary target query, domain, URL, or identifier (default: "https://stripe.com")https://stripe.com
secondaryNoOptional secondary filter (address, condition, permit type, role keyword, or language).

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

B3.2/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden, and it does disclose meaningful traits: it runs over 'pure HTTP' (no browser rendering), and it auto-returns a free 1-row preview when CEA_API_KEY is unset, implying an auth/billing gate. It still omits cost/rate behavior for full runs, result cardinality, and any failure modes.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with the verb and output fields first, followed by a compact parenthetical on the preview and actor source. Dense but no wasted sentences; the long field enumeration is the only mild bloat.

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?

For a simple two-parameter tool with no output schema, the definition covers what kind of data comes back and the auth/key condition. It is still thin on how results are shaped (one row per query? multiple matches?) and on what the secondary filter actually constrains in this domain, which the generic schema text does not resolve.

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 both parameters are already documented and the baseline is 3. The description adds no syntax, format, or example guidance for 'query' or 'secondary' beyond what the schema states, so it neither compensates nor detracts.

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

Purpose4/5

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

The description opens with a specific verb ('Extract') and enumerates the exact resources returned: business emails, phones, social profiles, MX providers, and tech stack. It is clearly a contact-enrichment/scraping tool, distinguishable in spirit from siblings like email_verifier_catch_all_validator or skip_trace_owner_phone_finder, though it never names an alternative explicitly.

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?

There is no statement of when to reach for this tool versus the sibling verifier or skip-trace tools, and no exclusions or prerequisites beyond the parenthetical API-key note. The agent is left to infer that this is the 'get emails from a domain/maps query' entry point.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools