MRR Ledger

Revenue leaderboard (ranked)

leaderboard

Read-onlyIdempotent

Use when the user asks which AI agents or AI startups make the most money, or for a top-N revenue ranking. Returns businesses ranked by latest sourced annualized revenue, highest first (briefs as in search_businesses); filters category, verified_only, limit (max 50). Example: {"category":"coding-agents","limit":5} -> the top 5 coding agents by revenue. Cost: free (100 calls/day without a key).

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`limit`	No	Default 10, max 50.
`category`	No	Category slug, e.g. coding-agents (see list_categories).
`verified_only`	No	Keep only businesses whose headline figure is payment-processor verified (headline_verification not null).

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed2 schema fields changedOct 20, 2026
- addedInput schema / properties / category / description
```
Added value: +"Category slug, e.g. coding-agents (see list_categories)."
```
- addedInput schema / properties / limit / description
```
Added value: +"Default 10, max 50."
```

Changed5 schema fields changedOct 20, 2026

addedOutput schema / properties / result / items / properties / referral
```
Added value: +{
+  "type": "boolean"
+}
```

addedOutput schema / properties / result / items / properties / signup_go_url

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Same link via mrrledger.com/go/<slug> (counts the click, then 302)",
+  "type": "string"
+}

addedOutput schema / properties / result / items / properties / signup_url

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Referral link (only on businesses with one). Always shown with signup_url_disclosure; never affects figures, ranking, sorting or verification.",
+  "type": "string"
+}

addedOutput schema / properties / result / items / properties / signup_url_disclosure
```
Added value: +{
+  "type": "string"
+}
```
addedOutput schema / properties / result / items / properties / signup_url_label
```
Added value: +{
+  "type": "string"
+}
```

First observedOct 18, 2026

TDQS

A4.4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly/idempotent/non-destructive and closed-world, so the lower bar applies. The description still adds real value: sort direction, output shape ('briefs as in search_businesses'), the 50-item cap, and cost/rate limit (free, 100 calls/day without a key).

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 usage trigger, then result semantics, then filters and cost, all in one tight paragraph plus a compact example. Dense but every clause carries information; a light structure (e.g., separating cost) would be the only improvement.

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?

Output schema exists so return values needn't be detailed, and the description still covers ordering, filter set, cap, and cost. For a zero-required-param ranked-list tool with full schema coverage and annotations, nothing an agent needs to invoke it correctly is missing.

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?

Schema coverage is 100% so the baseline is 3; the description goes beyond by showing a concrete example invocation and clarifying the limit ceiling, and it points to list_categories for valid category slugs. The verified_only semantics are left to the schema, which already documents them.

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 and ranked resource ('Returns businesses ranked by latest sourced annualized revenue, highest first') plus the user question it answers. It distinguishes itself from search_businesses by noting the brief format matches but is ranked by revenue.

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?

Opens with an explicit trigger ('Use when the user asks which AI agents or AI startups make the most money, or for a top-N revenue ranking') and mentions search_businesses as the related retrieval tool. It does not explicitly state when to prefer search_businesses or compare_businesses instead, so routing is clear but not exhaustively delimited.

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

All MRR Ledger tools Inspect

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

Need Help?