Loading ToolBench
A maintenance scheduler client for dispatching technicians to facility maintenance issues by location and issue type
This MCP server has critical definition quality issues. The single tool 'schedule_dispatch' has an adequate name but severely lacks descriptions, parameter documentation, and output schema specification. The tool description is minimal (69 chars, below the baseline of 194 chars), parameters lack meaningful descriptions beyond bare field names, and there is no documented output schema. The implementation is a stub returning a hardcoded dictionary with no error handling, validation, or recovery guidance. This falls well below production standards.
Schedule a maintenance dispatch by location and issue type, returns assigned technician
Tool description is minimal (69 chars) and lacks depth. Baseline is 194 chars. Does not explain WHEN to use this tool, WHAT it returns, or prerequisite context.
Parameters 'location' and 'issue' have trivial descriptions that do not specify format, constraints, or examples. Baseline for param descriptions is 72 chars. LLMs cannot infer whether 'location' is a building name, ID, or address.
Output schema is completely undocumented. No documentation of what fields the tool returns, their types, or what they mean. The stub returns {'assigned_tech': 'Tech-04'} but this is not formally specified.
No error handling or recovery guidance. The tool will fail silently if inputs are invalid or the scheduling service is unavailable. LLMs receive no actionable error messages to guide retry or fallback behavior.
| Scored | Grade | Overall | Spec posture | Rubric |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-09-23 | F | 31 | 2026-07-28+ | v2 |
Tool description does not specify it modifies state (schedules a dispatch). Agents need to know this call has irreversible consequences.
No validation of input parameters. 'issue' accepts any free-form string, but facility maintenance likely has a known set of issue types (HVAC, plumbing, electrical, etc.). Should be an enum.
Tool name 'schedule_dispatch' is somewhat clear but 'dispatch' is vague. Does it dispatch a technician? A vehicle? A work order? Name should be more specific, e.g. 'schedule_maintenance_technician' or 'dispatch_technician_to_location'.