Autario Data Analytics Platform

calculate

Read-onlyIdempotent

Create a derived series from two indicators using an Excel-style op: ratio (A/B), ratio_pct (A/B100), diff (A-B), sum (A+B), product (AB). Returns the per-timepoint result + summary. Use for things like debt-to-GDP ratio, revenue-per-employee, spread between two yields.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`a`	Yes
`b`	Yes
`op`	No	ratio \| ratio_pct \| diff \| sum \| product
`full`	No	Return the full raw time series (heavy, many tokens). Default false → you get only the summary/stats, which is enough to ANSWER a question. Set true only when you must plot or export every point.
`time`	No
`entity`	Yes

TDQS

A4.2/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the agent knows this is a safe, non-destructive operation. The description adds that it returns per-timepoint results and a summary, and warns about heavy token usage for the 'full' parameter, which is useful but not extensive.

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 two sentences: the first explains the tool's function and operations, the second gives examples. It is front-loaded with key information and contains no filler.

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 tool has 6 parameters, no output schema, and moderate sibling complexity, the description covers the core purpose, operations, and output format. It warns about token-heavy usage. Missing details on 'time' and 'entity' parameters are minor gaps.

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?

The description adds meaning beyond the schema by explaining that 'a' and 'b' are indicators, listing ops in text, and clarifying that 'full=true' returns heavy raw data. With only 33% schema description coverage, these additions are valuable. However, 'time' and 'entity' remain sparsely described.

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 specifies the tool's purpose: creating a derived series from two indicators using Excel-style operations. It lists the operations and gives concrete examples (debt-to-GDP ratio, revenue-per-employee), which distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'correlate' or 'pct_change'.

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 provides explicit use cases ('Use for things like debt-to-GDP ratio...'), helping the agent decide when to invoke this tool. However, it does not mention when not to use it or suggest alternatives, which would improve the score.

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

All Autario Data Analytics Platform 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

A3.9/5.0

Disambiguation4/5

Most tools are strongly domain-specific with clear boundaries, especially the 360 reports and dataset/chart CRUD tools. Some overlap exists around driver analysis (find_drivers, what_matters, decompose_drivers) and dataset discovery (search_datasets, discover_by_topic, list_indicators), but the descriptions make the intended use cases mostly distinguishable.

Naming Consistency4/5

The vast majority of tools follow a clear snake_case verb_noun or get_noun pattern, e.g. list_connectors, refresh_connector, query_dataset, delete_dataset. Minor deviations such as calculate, describe, bubble_or_not, what_matters, and the 360-style report names keep it from being perfectly uniform.

Tool Count2/5

48 tools is far beyond the 3-15 range and even beyond the 25-tool threshold for a heavy surface. The platform is broad and the tools are organized into domains, but the sheer number creates a high selection burden for an agent and suggests the server is trying to cover too many workflows in one toolset.

Completeness4/5

The toolset covers dataset lifecycle, chart lifecycle, data discovery, querying, statistics, app context, connectors, and admin reports remarkably well. Notable gaps are the lack of a delete_chart tool and no row-level update/delete for datasets, but agents can generally work around these or treat them as intentional platform constraints.

Resources

Need Help?