Skip to main content
Glama

Compare Agent Versions

compare_agent_versions
Read-only

Two versions of ONE agent side by side over the same window — traces, failed rate, cost per trace, latency p50, TTFT p50 and tokens per trace — with the change between them, so "did v8 make it worse" is one call.

It is agent_traces_summary twice, each scoped through the registry filter for one version, and the same six rows and delta rules as the Rius console's compare tiles, so an agent and a human read one change. The change is in percentage points for the failed rate ("+1.0 pp", never "+50%") and a percent of the base otherwise; a dash means a side is unknown or the base is zero, never "no change". Below 20 traces on either side the reply says the differences can be noise; it never claims significance either way.

Refuses, rather than answering, where this deployment's filter registry does not advertise the version field: an older core would ignore the filter and return the whole agent's numbers on both sides, which would read as a confident "no change".

agent: the exact agent name (required). Read it off list_agents or off root_agent on list_agent_traces. dimension: which version identity to compare — agent (the agent definition, rius.main_agent.version) or service (the build, service.version; build is accepted as a synonym). The two are not interchangeable: read the values off agent_versions, which labels each. base: the older version's exact value, as agent_versions lists it. head: the newer version's exact value; the change is head against base. workspace: optional workspace id, name, or org-name/workspace-name when the same name occurs in two of your orgs (defaults to your default; use list_workspaces to discover them). hours: lookback window in hours (default 24), used for whichever of start/end is not given. start: optional absolute RFC3339 lower bound (e.g. "2026-08-01T00:00:00Z"); overrides the hours-derived value when given. end: optional absolute RFC3339 upper bound; overrides the hours-derived value when given. instance: optional exact instance id, narrowing both sides to one running copy of agent.

Example:

Did planner's version 8 make things worse than 7 this week?

{
    "name": "compare_agent_versions",
    "arguments": {
        "agent": "planner", "dimension": "agent", "base": "7", "head": "8",
        "hours": 168
    }
}

Compare the last two builds of planner.

{
    "name": "compare_agent_versions",
    "arguments": {
        "agent": "planner", "dimension": "service", "base": "2.3.1", "head": "2.4.0"
    }
}

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
endNo
baseYes
headYes
agentYes
hoursNo
startNo
instanceNo
dimensionYes
workspaceNo

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4.9/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations only declare readOnlyHint/openWorldHint, so the description carries real behavioral weight and does: delta units (percentage points for failed rate, percent of base otherwise), the dash-means-unknown convention, the sub-20-trace noise caveat, and the refusal-rather-than-misanswer policy. This is exactly the kind of edge-case disclosure annotations cannot provide.

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?

Front-loaded with the core purpose and the change semantics before the parameter block, and every paragraph earns its place. It is dense rather than bloated, though the prose runs long enough that a tighter version could lose nothing.

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?

For a nine-parameter comparison tool with an output schema, everything an agent needs to call it correctly is present: sourcing of exact version strings, refusal boundaries, delta interpretation, and ambiguity resolution for workspace names. Nothing material is left to inference.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters5/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate fully and does: every one of the nine parameters is explained, including where to source values (list_agents, agent_versions, list_workspaces), the base/head orientation rule, the dimension enum with a 'build' synonym, and the start/end-vs-hours override precedence.

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 specific verb+resource and scope: 'Two versions of ONE agent side by side over the same window', then enumerates exactly which six metrics are compared. It names the sibling relationship ('agent_traces_summary twice') so an agent can tell it apart from the single-version summary tool without opening either 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?

Explicitly routes the agent: this is agent_traces_summary applied to two versions, and it specifies the refusal condition (deployments whose filter registry lacks the version field). The two worked examples ('did v8 make it worse' vs 'compare the last two builds') show the dimension choice in context, and the dimension note warns the two identity axes are not interchangeable.

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.

Resources