B4 Index

Browse the B4 Index

b4_browse

Read-only

For browsing, filtering, or finding the index's name for something. Example: {"query": "warehouse picking", "domain": "Supply Chain"}. Search and filter every independently scored software category in the B4 Index. Browse by keyword, domain, quadrant, or industry. When filtering by industry, returns all vertical categories for that industry PLUS all horizontal categories (which apply to every industry). Each row carries its banded verdict — primary, confidence word, and a near-call flag — and the quadrant filter matches the verdict at whichever lens you are reading. Verdicts are banded (B4 methodology v4.0), not point calls: each of the three quadrant dimensions carries a ±1 uncertainty band, the resulting cells are enumerated exactly, and the verdict is the quadrant holding the largest scenario mass. Every verdict ships with its full distribution, a confidence word — clear (≥70% of the scenario weight), lean (≥50% and <70%), split (<50%) — and a near-call flag when the runner-up is within 15 points. An axis counts as high only when it clears the 3.5 line strictly, which on this 1–5 grid means only at 4 or above, so a category sitting exactly on the line gets the safer call: ties break in the order BUY → BRIDGE → BEWARE → BUILD, cheapest mistake first. Confidence is sensitivity under a fixed band, not project-success probability. Optional org lens: set org to "small", "medium" (the default) or "large" to read the same scores as a team of that engineering maturity — it shifts the center of the AI-feasibility band by −1 / 0 / +1 and nothing else. The lens is a filter the caller looks through, never a stored profile. Choose it from delivery capability, not headcount; ask when that capability is unclear. The raw scores themselves never change. Omit it and you get the default-lens numbers, which are the ones published on logged-out surfaces. Routing: a vendor or product name → b4_audit (one or many; add a short description of what it does for anything the index may not know); a need or problem in words → b4_recommend; an exact category name or id → b4_score (one category) or b4_compare (build vs buy paths); browsing, filtering, or an unknown vocabulary → b4_browse. When an audit row returns clarification.needed, relay askTheUser to the user and re-run that row with the answer as its description. [Needs a B4 plan: browse and score come with B4 Web.]

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`org`	No	Org-maturity lens: "small" (no dedicated engineering), "medium" (default — some AI capability), "large" (AI-mature). Shifts the AI-feasibility band center by −1/0/+1 at read time. A filter the caller looks through, never a stored profile.	medium
`limit`	No	Max results to return (default 20, max 100)
`query`	No	Search term to match against category names, vendors, domains, and rationales
`cursor`	No	Opaque continuation from the previous page. Keep filters and lens unchanged; restart on SNAPSHOT_EXPIRED.
`domain`	No	Filter by domain (e.g., 'Marketing Technology', 'CRM & Sales')
`industry`	No	Filter by industry group. Returns matching vertical categories + all horizontal categories. Options: Healthcare, Financial Services, Construction & Real Estate, Education, Energy & Utilities, Government, Automotive, Agriculture, Transportation & Logistics, Media & Entertainment, Legal, Professional Services, Nonprofits & Associations, Manufacturing, Retail & Commerce, Hospitality & Food Service, Telecom
`quadrant`	No	Filter by quadrant
`includeVendors`	No	Expand vendor lists; omitted by default for bounded pages.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description
`axes`	No	strategicDifferentiation (X) and aiFeasibility (Y)
`lens`	No
`domain`	No
`scores`	No	the five v3.2 dimension scores, 1-5
`urgency`	No
`vendors`	No
`verdict`	No	banded verdict: primary, confidence, nearCall, distribution
`category`	No
`evidence`	No	sources and research trail; present only with includeEvidence
`guidance`	No	how to use this result: meaning, action, what not to claim, confidence handling
`resolved`	Yes	false when nothing matched; the payload then carries no verdict
`rationale`	No
`vendorCount`	No
`evidenceHint`	No
`aiReplacement`	No
`vendorsWithheld`	No
`evidenceAvailable`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed5 schema fields changedSep 19, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / cursor

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Opaque continuation from the previous page. Keep filters and lens unchanged; restart on SNAPSHOT_EXPIRED.",
+  "maxLength": 2000,
+  "minLength": 1,
+  "type": "string"
+}

addedInput schema / properties / domain / minLength
```
Added value: +1
```

addedInput schema / properties / includeVendors

Added value: +{
+  "default": false,
+  "description": "Expand vendor lists; omitted by default for bounded pages.",
+  "type": "boolean"
+}

addedInput schema / properties / industry / minLength
```
Added value: +1
```
addedInput schema / properties / query / minLength
```
Added value: +1
```

Changed1 schema field changedSep 7, 2026

changedOutput schema / (root)

Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "$schema": "http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#",
+  "additionalProperties": true,
+  "properties": {
+    "aiReplacement": {},
+    "axes": {
+      "description": "strategicDifferentiation (X) and aiFeasibility (Y)"
+    },
+    "category": {
+      "type": [
+        "string",
+        "null"
+      ]
+    },
+    "domain": {
+      "type": [
+        "string",
+        "null"
+      ]
+    },
+    "evidence": {
+      "description": "sources and research trail; present only with includeEvidence"
+    },
+    "evidenceAvailable": {
+      "type": "boolean"
+    },
+    "evidenceHint": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "guidance": {
+      "description": "how to use this result: meaning, action, what not to claim, confidence handling"
+    },
+    "lens": {
+      "type": [
+        "string",
+        "null"
+      ]
+    },
+    "rationale": {
+      "type": [
+        "string",
+        "null"
+      ]
+    },
+    "resolved": {
+      "description": "false when nothing matched; the payload then carries no verdict",
+      "type": "boolean"
+    },
+    "scores": {
+      "description": "the five v3.2 dimension scores, 1-5"
+    },
+    "urgency": {},
+    "vendorCount": {
+      "type": "number"
+    },
+    "vendors": {},
+    "vendorsWithheld": {
+      "type": "number"
+    },
+    "verdict": {
+      "description": "banded verdict: primary, confidence, nearCall, distribution"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "resolved"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}

Changed1 schema field changedAug 9, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / org

Added value: +{
+  "default": "medium",
+  "description": "Org-maturity lens: \"small\" (no dedicated engineering), \"medium\" (default — some AI capability), \"large\" (AI-mature). Shifts the AI-feasibility band center by −1/0/+1 at read time. A filter the caller looks through, never a stored profile.",
+  "enum": [
+    "small",
+    "medium",
+    "large"
+  ],
+  "type": "string"
+}

First observedJul 4, 2026

TDQS

A4.6/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations only declare readOnlyHint/openWorldHint; the description supplies genuinely non-obvious behavior: the industry filter returns verticals PLUS all horizontals, each row carries a banded verdict with confidence word and near-call flag, tie-break order BUY → BRIDGE → BEWARE → BUILD, the org lens shifts only the AI-feasibility band center, and the lens is a read-time filter rather than a stored profile. That is well beyond what the annotations or schema convey.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The opening sentence is correctly front-loaded and short, but the middle of the description lectures on B4 methodology v4.0 banding, scenario mass, the 3.5 line, and sensitivity semantics — content that helps interpret verdicts but does little to help an agent select or invoke the tool. Roughly a third of the text could be cut without losing routing or callable guidance.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained, yet the description does explain verdict fields anyway. Combined with the routing block, lens semantics, plan prerequisite, and industry-filter behavior, the definition is complete enough to call correctly; the only real redundancy is the methodology aside.

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 coverage is 100%, so a baseline of 3 is warranted, but the description adds real meaning on top: the org lens ('choose it from delivery capability, not headcount' and its −1/0/+1 shift), the industry filter's vertical+horizontal expansion, and the quadrant filter matching the verdict at whichever lens is being read. Only limit/cursor/query get no extra gloss, which the schema already covers.

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 states a specific verb triad (browse, filter, find) against a concrete resource (every independently scored software category in the B4 Index), and then explicitly distinguishes itself from all four siblings in the routing block. An agent can pick this tool over b4_audit/b4_recommend/b4_score/b4_compare without opening any schema.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The routing paragraph is a textbook when-to-use guide: vendor/product name → b4_audit, need in words → b4_recommend, exact category name/id → b4_score or b4_compare, and 'browsing, filtering, or an unknown vocabulary → b4_browse'. It also states the plan prerequisite ('Needs a B4 plan') and the clarification relay path.

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

All B4 Index tools Inspect

Try in Browser

One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources

Need Help?