Skip to main content
Glama

IMERGEA M&A Advisory

by com.imergea

IMERGEA Transaction Readiness

imergea_assess_transaction_readiness
Read-onlyIdempotent

Assess how ready an SME or mid-market company is for buyer or investor scrutiny using the IMERGEA 7-dimension Sell-Ready / SME Friction Map. Returns a 0-100 readiness score, verdict, friction by dimension, and a prioritised action plan.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
legalYesLegal, tax, IP, employment and regulatory readiness: 1=material gaps/exposure; 3=current with manageable exposure; 5=recently audited and transfer-ready.
languageNoLanguage for human-readable results.en
strategyYesStrategic positioning and growth visibility: 1=no documented plan; 3=basic growth narrative; 5=data-backed growth story with clear buyer synergy logic.
contractsYesCustomer/supplier contracts and revenue visibility: 1=informal/high concentration; 3=main contracts signed; 5=fully documented and diversified.
financialsYesFinancial clarity and reporting: 1=no management reporting; 3=normalized P&L/basic KPIs; 5=audit-ready accounts, EBITDA bridge and clear recurring revenue.
governanceYesCorporate structure and governance readiness: 1=unclear/informal; 3=basic documents in place; 5=fully rationalized, executed and data-room ready.
managementYesManagement depth and founder dependency: 1=founder-dependent; 3=second line exists but founder remains central; 5=team can operate without founder.
operationsYesOperational processes, systems and scalability: 1=informal/undocumented; 3=main processes documented; 5=integrated, automated, compliant and transferable.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
toolYes
verdictYes
providerYes
dimensionsYes
disclaimerYes
readiness_scoreYes
priority_actionsNo

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false, so the agent knows it's a safe, non-mutating operation. The description adds value by specifying the output (0-100 score, verdict, friction by dimension, action plan), which clarifies the behavioral result beyond the annotations. It does not contradict annotations and adds useful non-obvious details about the return structure.

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 a single, well-structured sentence that packs in the target audience, the framework used, and the output components. It is front-loaded with the primary purpose and contains no filler or repetition. Every clause adds meaningful information.

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's moderate complexity (7 required parameters, output schema exists), the description provides sufficient context: it names the framework, the output categories, and the scoring scale. It does not explain edge cases or prerequisites, but the schema and annotations cover safety and parameter details. The description is adequate for an agent to understand the tool's role and invoke it correctly.

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?

Input schema has 100% description coverage; each parameter (governance, financials, contracts, etc.) has a detailed 1-5 scale description. The tool description itself does not repeat or augment parameter semantics, only mentions the 7 dimensions generically. Since the schema fully documents parameters, a 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 assesses readiness for buyer/investor scrutiny using the IMERGEA 7-dimension map. It specifies the target (SME/mid-market), the method, and the output (score, verdict, friction, action plan). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like imergea_business_valuation or imergea_recommend_advisory_service.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

The description implies the tool is for readiness assessment but does not explicitly contrast it with alternatives or state when not to use it. It mentions the readiness focus, which separates it from valuation and advisory services, but lacks explicit usage guidance like 'use this before a transaction' or 'when a company wants to gauge sell-readiness.' No exclusions or alternatives are named.

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

All IMERGEA M&A Advisory 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

A3.9/5.0
Disambiguation2/5

The analytical and deal-flow tools are distinct, but the service-info cluster overlaps heavily: get_capabilities, list_advisory_services, recommend_advisory_service, and get_advisory_booking_link all describe paid packages, pricing, or handoff routing. In particular, get_advisory_booking_link and list_advisory_services both claim to handle price questions, making the boundaries genuinely unclear for an agent.

Naming Consistency3/5

Most tools follow an imergea_<verb>_<object> pattern such as assess_transaction_readiness, get_capabilities, and refer_deal, but imergea_business_valuation and imergea_partner_application are noun-phrase names without an imperative verb. The prefix and snake_case keep everything readable, yet the convention is mixed.

Tool Count4/5

Eight tools is a reasonable size for an M&A advisory surface covering valuation, readiness, services, partner intake, and deal referral. However, four of the eight tools are dedicated to the same discovery/booking funnel—capabilities, list services, recommend, and booking link—so the cluster feels slightly over-decomposed.

Completeness4/5

The core read-only journeys are covered: free indicative valuation, readiness assessment, paid service discovery and booking handoff, partner application, and deal referral. There are minor gaps such as no general contact/FAQ tool or status-tracking mechanism, but agents can work around these because the server intentionally avoids personal-data submission and hands off to human forms.

Resources