Zaira Labs Guide

zaira_compare_tools

Read-onlyIdempotent

Compare 2-3 developer tools, libraries or programming languages side by side. Returns each entry's full Markdown-KV block 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"]}
Two languages for a CLI: {slugs: ["go", "rust"]}

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, pinecone, algolia. Don't pass "stripe-cloud" — it doesn't exist.

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

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "slugs": "<slugs>"
    },
    "name": "zaira_compare_tools"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`slugs`	Yes	Array of 2-3 tool slugs to compare. Example: ["supabase", "firebase"]

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedJul 6, 2026

TDQS

A4.8/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already declare read-only, idempotent, closed-world, but the description adds substantial behavior beyond them: the '===' separator format, enrichment of alternatives/worksWith with tagline and agent-readiness, partial results with a trailing 'slugs not found' note, and deduplication of duplicate slugs. These are non-obvious traits an agent could not derive from the annotations or schema.

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 core behavior and return format are front-loaded, and the examples and edge cases are cleanly sectioned rather than buried in prose. It is longer than strictly necessary — the six examples and five edge cases overlap somewhat — but each block carries actionable information rather than filler.

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 single-parameter read tool with no output schema, the description covers everything an agent needs: what it returns, how results are delimited, how enrichment works, how partial failures are surfaced, and which slug forms are invalid. No meaningful gap remains.

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% and the schema already enforces minItems 2 / maxItems 3, so the description's restatement of those bounds adds little. However, it does add real meaning beyond the schema: the naming convention caveat that single-entry tools like stripe, auth0, and firebase have no '-cloud'/'-oss' variant, which prevents a class of invalid calls the pattern regex would not catch.

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 and resource: 'Compare 2-3 developer tools, libraries or programming languages side by side.' It also states the return shape (Markdown-KV blocks separated by '==='), which distinguishes it from zaira_get_tool (single entry) and zaira_search_tools (discovery).

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?

It gives explicit when-to-use guidance with six concrete examples, plus a clear rule for choosing same-category comparisons ('which should I pick?') versus cross-category ones ('compatibility question'). It also states the 2-3 slug bounds and what to do for more (run pairs), leaving nothing to inference.

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 tools Inspect

Try in Browser

Claude Code, inside the Godot 4 editorFlockbay puts an AI agent in the real Godot 4 editor: it writes GDScript, runs your game and fixes what breaks. Free, or bring your own Claude Code or Codex.flockbay.comAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources

Need Help?