SecureLend Market

compare_business_credit_cards

Read-only

Search SecureLend’s product database for business credit cards matching the user’s criteria (optional credit score, optional annual revenue, optional business age). Returns a list of cards with issuer details, fees (e.g., annual fee), APR, credit limit information when available, and a summary of who each card is best for. Results may include SecureLend data and authorized partner integrations when enabled. This tool does not submit an application; if the user chooses to apply, they are directed to the issuer’s website.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`creditScore`	No	The applicant's estimated credit score (300-850).
`annualRevenue`	No	The business's annual revenue in USD.
`businessAgeInYears`	No	The age of the business in years.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`offers`	Yes
`metadata`	Yes

TDQS

A4.3/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already indicate read-only and non-destructive behavior; the description adds useful context that results may include partner integrations and that applications are directed to the issuer's website. This goes beyond what annotations alone convey.

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

Conciseness5/5

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

Three tightly written sentences with no filler: the first states scope and criteria, the second details return information, and the third clarifies non-application behavior. Every sentence earns its place.

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?

With an output schema present, return values need no explanation. The description covers search scope, optional filters, data sources, and next steps, making it complete for a search tool.

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 covers all three parameters with full descriptions (ranges, units, meaning). The description only restates them as optional criteria, adding no additional semantic detail 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?

Description clearly states it searches SecureLend's product database for business credit cards, using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from siblings like compare_personal_credit_cards and compare_business_loans by scoping to business credit cards only.

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 implies use when the user wants to compare business credit cards and explicitly notes that it does not submit applications. However, it does not name sibling tools as alternatives, so guidance is clear but not fully explicit.

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

All SecureLend Market tools Inspect

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

A4.1/5.0

Disambiguation4/5

Most tools have clear, distinct purposes, but there are a few potentially confusing pairs. Compare_personal_banking and compare_savings_accounts overlap somewhat, and calculate_loan_payment could be mistaken for covering mortgages despite calculate_mortgage_payment existing. Overall, descriptions help resolve most ambiguity.

Naming Consistency5/5

Tool names follow a consistent verb_noun pattern throughout: compare_* for comparisons, calculate_* for calculations, display_* for forms, submit_* for submissions, and get_* for offers. All names use lowercase with underscores, creating a predictable and uniform naming scheme.

Tool Count4/5

With 22 tools, the count is on the higher side but appropriate given the broad financial marketplace domain. Each tool covers a specific product category or workflow step, so the size feels justified rather than bloated. It is slightly heavy but not excessive for the scope.

Completeness4/5

The tool surface covers comparison, calculation, lead generation, prequalification, document upload, and status tracking, forming a comprehensive marketplace workflow. Minor gaps exist, such as no tools for updating or canceling applications, but these are workarounds and the core user journey is well supported.

Resources

Need Help?