Skip to main content
Glama

Mencoro

by com.mencoro
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Organization brand overview

get_organization_overview
Read-onlyIdempotent

Latest-snapshot rank-health board across all active projects in an organization: one row per brand (share of voice, mention rate, average mention position, positivity, tracked-query count in total and per engine family: AI, SERP, Shopping) ranked by share of voice, plus an organization-level aggregate. This is a current-state snapshot and takes NO date window; for date-ranged comparison, call the per-project tools (e.g. get_project_rank_tracking_stats) for each project id returned here. Answers questions like "give me a company-wide summary of share of voice and sentiment across all my projects".

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
organizationIdYes

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
projectsYes
aggregateYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed5 schema fields changed
    • addedOutput schema / properties / projects / items / properties / aiTrackedQueryCount
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "How many of trackedQueryCount run on an AI answer engine (ChatGPT, Claude, Perplexity, Google AI Overview, Google AI Mode).",
+  "type": "integer"
+}
    • addedOutput schema / properties / projects / items / properties / serpTrackedQueryCount
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "How many of trackedQueryCount run on classic Google SERP.",
+  "type": "integer"
+}
    • addedOutput schema / properties / projects / items / properties / shoppingTrackedQueryCount
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "How many of trackedQueryCount run on Google Shopping.",
+  "type": "integer"
+}
    • addedOutput schema / properties / projects / items / properties / trackedQueryCount / description
      Added value: +"Configured tracked queries of the project, paused ones included."
    • changedOutput schema / properties / projects / items / required
      Previous value: -[
-  "projectId",
-  "name",
-  "status",
-  "trackedQueryCount"
-]New value: +[
+  "projectId",
+  "name",
+  "status",
+  "trackedQueryCount",
+  "aiTrackedQueryCount",
+  "serpTrackedQueryCount",
+  "shoppingTrackedQueryCount"
+]
  2. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedOutput schema / properties / projects / items / properties / mentionRate / description
      Previous value: -"Percentage 0-100 of tracked queries with a result in the period; higher is better."New value: +"Percentage 0-100 of AI checks (one per tracked query x engine x UTC day) across all retained data that mentioned the brand, each check counted as the share of its passes that did; higher is better."
  3. Changed16 schema fields changed
    • addedOutput schema / properties / aggregate / properties / avgMentionPosition / anyOf
      Added value: +[
+  {
+    "type": "number"
+  },
+  {
+    "type": "null"
+  }
+]
    • removedOutput schema / properties / aggregate / properties / avgMentionPosition / type
      Removed value: -[
-  "number",
-  "null"
-]
    • addedOutput schema / properties / aggregate / properties / avgMentionRate / anyOf
      Added value: +[
+  {
+    "type": "integer"
+  },
+  {
+    "type": "null"
+  }
+]
    • removedOutput schema / properties / aggregate / properties / avgMentionRate / type
      Removed value: -[
-  "integer",
-  "null"
-]
    • addedOutput schema / properties / aggregate / properties / avgPositivityIndex / anyOf
      Added value: +[
+  {
+    "type": "integer"
+  },
+  {
+    "type": "null"
+  }
+]
    • removedOutput schema / properties / aggregate / properties / avgPositivityIndex / type
      Removed value: -[
-  "integer",
-  "null"
-]
    • addedOutput schema / properties / aggregate / properties / avgShareOfVoice / anyOf
      Added value: +[
+  {
+    "type": "number"
+  },
+  {
+    "type": "null"
+  }
+]
    • removedOutput schema / properties / aggregate / properties / avgShareOfVoice / type
      Removed value: -[
-  "number",
-  "null"
-]
    • addedOutput schema / properties / projects / items / properties / avgMentionPosition / anyOf
      Added value: +[
+  {
+    "type": "number"
+  },
+  {
+    "type": "null"
+  }
+]
    • removedOutput schema / properties / projects / items / properties / avgMentionPosition / type
      Removed value: -[
-  "number",
-  "null"
-]
    • addedOutput schema / properties / projects / items / properties / mentionRate / anyOf
      Added value: +[
+  {
+    "type": "integer"
+  },
+  {
+    "type": "null"
+  }
+]
    • removedOutput schema / properties / projects / items / properties / mentionRate / type
      Removed value: -[
-  "integer",
-  "null"
-]
    • addedOutput schema / properties / projects / items / properties / positivityIndex / anyOf
      Added value: +[
+  {
+    "type": "integer"
+  },
+  {
+    "type": "null"
+  }
+]
    • removedOutput schema / properties / projects / items / properties / positivityIndex / type
      Removed value: -[
-  "integer",
-  "null"
-]
    • addedOutput schema / properties / projects / items / properties / shareOfVoice / anyOf
      Added value: +[
+  {
+    "type": "number"
+  },
+  {
+    "type": "null"
+  }
+]
    • removedOutput schema / properties / projects / items / properties / shareOfVoice / type
      Removed value: -[
-  "number",
-  "null"
-]
  4. First observed

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered structurally. The description adds one genuinely non-obvious behavioral fact — that it takes NO date window and is a current-state snapshot — which annotations cannot express. It says nothing about auth requirements, aggregation lag, or large-organization performance.

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

Conciseness4/5

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

Front-loaded with the resource and output shape, then the usage constraint and the example question. The middle sentence is dense with column names but each earns its place; the only redundancy is restating the snapshot/no-date-window point in the example sentence.

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?

Aggregate tool with an output schema present, so return values need no further explanation — yet the description still names the row grain and aggregate. Required param, routing alternative, and the no-date-window constraint are all covered; nothing an agent needs to call it correctly is missing.

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% and the single organizationId parameter is undocumented, so the description must compensate. It scopes the tool to an organization and clarifies the absence of date parameters, but adds no meaning about what organizationId accepts or where to obtain it. Marginal compensation for a one-param tool.

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?

States a specific verb+resource ('rank-health board across all active projects in an organization') and enumerates the returned columns — share of voice, mention rate, position, positivity, query counts — so the agent knows exactly what this tool produces. It also explicitly distinguishes itself from the per-project time-series tools.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

Gives both when-to-use ('company-wide summary of share of voice and sentiment across all my projects') and when-not ('for date-ranged comparison, call the per-project tools ... for each project id returned here'), naming the specific alternative. Routing is unambiguous.

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

All Mencoro 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