Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Uncork

by app.netlify.uncork
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Find products that fix a bottleneck

find_fix
Read-only

Find existing products that remove a specific work bottleneck: active YC startups, open-source GitHub repos and Show HN launches (~46k). Call it when the user complains that something is slow, manual, repetitive or error-prone (in a team, workflow or codebase), or asks "is there a tool/library/startup that…". Call it before suggesting they build or script it themselves. Pass the problem in the user's own words, any language, with concrete context (who, what volume, which stack). Returns up to 5 picks ranked only by how well they fit, each with name, link, website and why it fits. Show the user the links as given. An empty result means nothing in the index fits: say so rather than guessing. Takes ~3-6 s.

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": {
      "problem": "<problem>"
    },
    "name": "find_fix"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
problemYesThe bottleneck as the user describes it, e.g. "our sales reps spend two hours a day typing call notes into the CRM".

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
picksYesBest fit first. Empty when nothing in the index clearly fixes the problem.
bottleneckYesOne sentence naming the real bottleneck, in the language of the problem. Empty when there are no picks.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "properties": {
+    "bottleneck": {
+      "description": "One sentence naming the real bottleneck, in the language of the problem. Empty when there are no picks.",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "picks": {
+      "description": "Best fit first. Empty when nothing in the index clearly fixes the problem.",
+      "items": {
+        "properties": {
+          "github_stars": {
+            "type": "integer"
+          },
+          "hn_points": {
+            "description": "Show HN points.",
+            "type": "integer"
+          },
+          "language": {
+            "description": "Main programming language of a repo.",
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "last_seen_year": {
+            "description": "Year the repo last trended or the Show HN launched.",
+            "type": "integer"
+          },
+          "name": {
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "source": {
+            "description": "yc = YC startup, github = open-source repo, hn = Show HN launch.",
+            "enum": [
+              "yc",
+              "github",
+              "hn"
+            ],
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "tagline": {
+            "description": "One-line description from the source.",
+            "type": [
+              "string",
+              "null"
+            ]
+          },
+          "url": {
+            "description": "Link to show the user; redirects to the product.",
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "website": {
+            "description": "Product domain or github.com/owner/repo, as plain text.",
+            "type": [
+              "string",
+              "null"
+            ]
+          },
+          "why": {
+            "description": "How this product removes the bottleneck, in the language of the problem.",
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "yc_batch": {
+            "description": "YC batch, e.g. W24.",
+            "type": "string"
+          }
+        },
+        "required": [
+          "source",
+          "name",
+          "url",
+          "why"
+        ],
+        "type": "object"
+      },
+      "maxItems": 5,
+      "type": "array"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "bottleneck",
+    "picks"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}
  2. First observed

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already cover read-only and non-destructive safety, and the description layers on genuinely new behavior: up to 5 picks ranked solely by fit, an explicit empty-result protocol (say nothing fits rather than guessing), a presentation constraint (show links as given), and a ~3-6 s latency expectation. These are operational facts an agent could not recover 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.

Conciseness5/5

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

Four tight paragraphs, front-loaded with what it searches, then triggers, then input guidance, then output/time expectations. No sentence is filler and nothing important is buried.

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 required-parameter lookup with an existing output schema, the description covers everything an agent needs: what corpus is searched, when to reach for it, how to phrase the input, what comes back, how to handle zero results, and how long it takes.

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% with a worked example, so the baseline is 3; the description earns an extra point by specifying how to fill it — user's own words, any language, and concrete context (who, what volume, which stack). That is real query-construction guidance not present in the schema.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb and resource (find existing products) and pins the scope precisely: active YC startups, open-source GitHub repos and Show HN launches (~46k). What it doesn't do is differentiate itself from the near-identically named sibling search_products, so an agent facing both must infer the split.

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?

Explicit trigger conditions are given (user complains something is slow, manual, repetitive or error-prone; or asks 'is there a tool/library/startup that…'), plus a sequencing rule: call it before suggesting the user build or script it themselves. No when-not-to-use case and no routing away from the sibling, which keeps it off a 5.

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

All Uncork toolsInspect
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