Skip to main content
Glama

Compare rows side by side

dataset_compare

The rows of the Injection Molding Cost Checker dataset whose column is any of the given values, in the order given, for "X vs Y" questions.

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": {
      "column": "<column>",
      "values": "<values>"
    },
    "name": "dataset_compare"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
columnYes
valuesYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

C2.8/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It adds only that rows are returned in the order of the given values; it does not state read-only behavior, output structure, limits, or any permission/rate considerations.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

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

The definition is a single sentence and not padded, but it is grammatically broken and lacks a front-loaded verb. Its structure makes the intended action harder to parse than necessary.

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

Completeness3/5

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

For a simple two-parameter read tool with no output schema, the description should more clearly state what is returned and what 'compare' entails. It names the dataset and filter semantics but leaves return shape and comparison behavior vague.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It partially does by clarifying that the column is matched against any of the given values and that value order is significant, but it omits constraints such as the 2-10 value range and non-empty column name.

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

Purpose3/5

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

The description identifies the resource (rows of the Injection Molding Cost Checker dataset) and the filtering condition (column matches any given values), but it is a sentence fragment with no clear action verb. It does not explicitly explain what 'compare' means or how this differs from sibling tools like dataset_search or dataset_row.

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?

It gives a narrow usage hint with 'for "X vs Y" questions,' which implies the tool is for comparison scenarios. However, it does not state when to use this instead of sibling tools or any exclusions, leaving the agent to infer alternatives.

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

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources