Admin Substitute

scaling.readiness_score

Read-only

Assess if a trade business is ready to scale from solo/small operation to multi-crew operator mode. Evaluates financial strength, systems maturity, team capability, and market demand.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`profitMargin`	No	Profit margin percentage (0-100)
`annualRevenue`	Yes	Annual revenue ($)
`employeeCount`	Yes	Current employee count
`avgMonthlyLeads`	No	Average new leads per month
`repeatClientRate`	No	Percentage of revenue from repeat clients (0-100)
`ownerOnToolsPercent`	No	Percentage of time owner spends doing trade work vs managing (0-100)
`hasDocumentedProcesses`	No	Are processes documented and delegatable?
`hasJobManagementSoftware`	No	Using job management software?

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

TDQS

A3.6/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already mark the tool as read-only (readOnlyHint: true). The description adds context about the evaluation areas (financial strength, systems maturity, team capability, market demand) but does not disclose calculation methods, output format, or rate limits. It adds moderate value beyond annotations.

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?

The description is exceptionally concise: two sentences that are front-loaded. The first sentence states the core purpose and target user, the second lists the dimensions evaluated. No unnecessary words.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the complexity (8 parameters, output schema exists), the description is fairly complete. It covers the goal, target, and evaluation areas. However, it could mention required parameters (annualRevenue, employeeCount) and that the tool returns a readiness score. Still, with output schema handling return info, it is minimally complete.

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 description coverage is 100% (all 8 parameters have descriptions). The tool description groups parameters into four categories, but does not add specific meaning beyond what the schema already provides. Baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 clearly states the tool's purpose: assessing readiness to scale a trade business from solo to multi-crew operation. It uses a specific verb ('assess') and resource ('readiness to scale'), and the categorization into four evaluation areas distinguishes it from sibling analytics tools.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

No explicit guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like analytics.dashboard or formation.location_score. The description implies a use case but does not give conditions, prerequisites, or exclusion criteria.

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

All Admin Substitute 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

A3.8/5.0

Disambiguation4/5

Most tools have distinct resource+action naming (e.g., leads.create, jobs.list), but some overlap exists in analytics tools (dashboard, detailed, financials) and workflow automations (process_lead vs google_ads_pipeline). Descriptions clarify purposes, so slight confusion is possible but limited.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tools follow a consistent `domain.action` pattern (e.g., leads.create, billing.status). No mixing of camelCase or snake_case. Even complex names like lifecycle.assess or scaling.readiness_score adhere to the convention.

Tool Count1/5

95 tools is far beyond typical well-scoped servers (3-15). While the server aims to cover an entire business management platform, this volume is overwhelming for an agent, making selection and memory difficult.

Completeness5/5

The tool surface is exceptionally comprehensive, covering formation, hiring, compliance, funding, leads, quotes, jobs, invoicing, payments, marketing, analytics, integrations, webhooks, workflows, and more. Almost no obvious gaps in the lifecycle of running a trade business.

Resources

Need Help?