Skip to main content
Glama

kolmo-mcp-server

by io.kolmo.www

Renovation ROI

get_project_roi
Read-onlyIdempotent

Get the estimated return on investment (ROI) for a home remodeling project in the Seattle area. Based on Remodeling Magazine Cost vs. Value data for the Pacific Northwest. Helps homeowners decide which projects add the most resale value — e.g. "What ROI does a kitchen remodel get in Seattle?" or "Which remodel pays off the most?"

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
projectTypeNoType of project, e.g. "kitchen", "bathroom", "deck", "windows", "siding", "ADU", "basement". Omit to see all projects ranked by ROI.
estimatedCostNoYour estimated project budget in USD. If provided, returns expected resale value added.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
marketYes
sourceYesThird-party dataset. Cite it alongside Kolmo.
resultsNo
disclaimerYes
attributionYes
neighborhoodNo
getAccurateQuoteYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

  1. Changed6 schema fields changed
    • removedOutput schema / properties / attribution / properties / contractorLicense
      Removed value: -{
-  "type": "string"
-}
    • removedOutput schema / properties / attribution / properties / note
      Removed value: -{
-  "type": "string"
-}
    • removedOutput schema / properties / attribution / properties / organization
      Removed value: -{
-  "type": "string"
-}
    • removedOutput schema / properties / attribution / properties / retrievedFrom
      Removed value: -{
-  "type": "string"
-}
    • removedOutput schema / properties / attribution / properties / url
      Removed value: -{
-  "type": "string"
-}
    • changedOutput schema / properties / attribution / required
      Previous value: -[
-  "organization",
-  "contractorLicense",
-  "url",
-  "sourceUrl",
-  "citeAs",
-  "retrievedFrom",
-  "note"
-]New value: +[
+  "sourceUrl",
+  "citeAs"
+]
  2. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "$schema": "http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#",
+  "additionalProperties": true,
+  "properties": {
+    "attribution": {
+      "additionalProperties": true,
+      "properties": {
+        "citeAs": {
+          "description": "Ready-made citation line. Use verbatim.",
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        "contractorLicense": {
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        "note": {
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        "organization": {
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        "primarySource": {
+          "description": "Present when Kolmo verified but does not author the fact — cite both.",
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        "retrievedFrom": {
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        "sourceUrl": {
+          "description": "The specific page these facts render on. Link this, not the site root.",
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        "url": {
+          "type": "string"
+        }
+      },
+      "required": [
+        "organization",
+        "contractorLicense",
+        "url",
+        "sourceUrl",
+        "citeAs",
+        "retrievedFrom",
+        "note"
+      ],
+      "type": "object"
+    },
+    "disclaimer": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "getAccurateQuote": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "market": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "neighborhood": {},
+    "results": {},
+    "source": {
+      "description": "Third-party dataset. Cite it alongside Kolmo.",
+      "type": "string"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "market",
+    "source",
+    "disclaimer",
+    "getAccurateQuote",
+    "attribution"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}
  3. First observed

TDQS

A4.1/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already indicate readOnly, idempotent, and non-destructive behavior, so the description only needs to add behavioral context. It adds the data source ('Remodeling Magazine Cost vs. Value for the Pacific Northwest') and clarifies outputs are estimates, which sets proper expectations. No contradiction with annotations.

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?

Three sentences, each earning its place: the core action, the authoritative data source, and practical usage examples. It is front-loaded with the main purpose and avoids fluff while still being approachable.

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?

For a simple read-only lookup with two optional parameters and an output schema, the description covers what the tool does, why it exists, and what data underlies it. It appropriately does not detail return values since the output schema exists. Minor omission is lack of explicit routing to related cost-estimation tools, but that is not required for basic completeness.

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 baseline of 3 applies. The description reinforces projectType through examples like 'kitchen remodel' and hints at estimatedCost through 'resale value added,' but it does not add new parameter information 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?

States a precise verb ('Get the estimated return on investment') and a specific resource ('home remodeling project in the Seattle area'), with data basis. The use-case examples further distinguish it from sibling tools like get_estimate or list_projects by emphasizing ROI/resale value.

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?

The description identifies the decision context ('Helps homeowners decide which projects add the most resale value') and gives concrete example queries. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use this tool, so agents must infer boundaries from the sibling list.

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

All kolmo-mcp-server toolsInspect
Try in Browser
RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Disambiguation2/5

Several permit-related tools have overlapping boundaries: answer_permit_question, check_permit_requirements, and get_permit_rule_details all return timeline/fee/submittal information and can answer 'do I need a permit' style questions. get_material_catalog and get_material_options also target similar material-selection needs. The descriptions help, but an agent could easily select the wrong tool in the permit cluster.

Naming Consistency5/5

All 36 tools follow a consistent snake_case verb_noun pattern, with get_ for single-item lookups and list_ for collection queries. There are no camelCase or mixed-style exceptions, so the naming is predictable and scannable.

Tool Count2/5

36 tools is well above the 25+ threshold and feels heavy even for a multi-domain construction assistant. Several retrieval tools overlap (list_services/list_projects/list_blog_posts vs search_content, get_material_catalog vs get_material_options), suggesting consolidation opportunities.

Completeness4/5

The permit workflow is well covered from parcel lookup through requirements, fees, submittals, and data freshness, and the prospect journey has services, estimates, financing, weather, reviews, and contact submission. Minor gaps exist, such as no active permit-status lookup and no way to create/update content, but these are outside the apparent read-only/lead-gen scope.

Resources