Skip to main content
Glama

Zaira Labs Guide

by ai.zairalabs

zaira_compare_tools

Read-onlyIdempotent

Compare 2-3 developer tools side by side. Returns each tool's full Markdown-KV entry separated by "===". Alternatives and worksWith are enriched with tagline + agent-readiness for resolved slugs. If any requested slugs are not found, they appear in a trailing "Note: slugs not found: ..." line; the comparison still returns for the ones found.

Examples:

  • Three search engines: {slugs: ["meilisearch-oss", "algolia", "elasticsearch-oss"]}

  • Two ORMs: {slugs: ["drizzle-orm", "prisma"]}

  • Three auth providers: {slugs: ["auth0", "clerk", "keycloak"]}

  • Hosted vs self-hosted for the same vendor: {slugs: ["redis-cloud", "redis-oss"]} — shows deployment trade-off

  • Postgres engine vs hosted offerings: {slugs: ["postgresql", "supabase-cloud", "cockroachdb-cloud"]}

Edge cases:

  • Cross-category comparisons (e.g., {slugs: ["auth0", "redis-cloud"]}) are allowed but rarely useful. Same-category comparisons answer "which should I pick?" better; cross-category answers "these coexist in my stack" — a compatibility question.

  • Minimum 2 slugs, maximum 3. Four or more is a validation error; for more, run pairs.

  • Invalid or unknown slugs are listed under "slugs not found"; the partial comparison returns for valid ones.

  • Duplicate slugs in the array are deduplicated.

  • A few tools are single entries (no -cloud/-oss split): stripe, auth0, firebase, twilio, openai-api, pinecone, algolia. Don't pass "stripe-cloud" — it doesn't exist.

Risk: read-only, closed-world, idempotent — no state change possible.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
slugsYesArray of 2-3 tool slugs to compare. Example: ["supabase", "firebase"]

TDQS

A4.9/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Description adds significant context beyond annotations: closed-world, no state change, behavior for unknown slugs (trailing note), deduplication, and return format (Markdown-KV separated by '==='). Annotations already indicate read-only and idempotent, and description reinforces and extends.

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?

The description is well-organized with sections, examples, and edge cases, but it is somewhat long. However, every sentence serves a purpose; the length is justified by the tool's complexity.

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?

Given the complexity (comparison logic, multiple inputs, error handling) and the absence of an output schema, the description covers all necessary aspects: return format, edge cases, validation, and usage guidance. It is fully complete for an agent to invoke correctly.

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?

With 100% schema coverage, the description still adds value by explaining the slug format, providing numerous examples, and clarifying constraints (min 2, max 3, pattern, deduplication). The description fully compensates for any potential ambiguity.

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 opens with a specific verb-resource pair ('Compare 2-3 developer tools side by side') and clearly distinguishes from siblings like zaira_get_tool (single tool) and zaira_search_tools (search). Examples further clarify the intended use.

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?

Provides explicit when-to-use (comparing tools) and when-not-to (cross-category less useful, max 3 slugs, 4+ runs pairs). Also lists single-entry tools and notes that invalid slugs yield a note. This fully guides the agent.

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

All Zaira Labs Guide 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

A4.7/5.0
Disambiguation5/5

Each tool has a distinct purpose: comparing tools, retrieving docs, getting a single tool, listing categories, and searching. There is no overlap or ambiguity.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tools follow a consistent 'zaira_verb_noun' pattern (e.g., compare_tools, get_docs). The naming is uniform and predictable.

Tool Count5/5

5 tools is well-scoped for a guide/reference server. Each tool serves a clear function without excessive overlap or missing coverage.

Completeness5/5

The tool set covers all expected operations for a tool guide: browsing categories, searching, retrieving details, comparing, and getting documentation. There are no obvious dead ends.

Resources