Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Palanor

by com.palanor
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

palanor_get_ai_venture_share

The AI share of U.S. venture-like money raised, from SEC Form D filings: per quarter or year, for the U.S. or one state, the money raised, the amount raised by companies Palanor classes as AI, their share, and the same for issuers raising $30 million or more. 2015 onward.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "palanor_get_ai_venture_share"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
toNoPeriods starting on or before, YYYY-MM-DD.
fromNoPeriods starting on or after, YYYY-MM-DD.
stateNoUS (default) or a two-letter U.S. state code.
periodNoDefault quarter.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A3.5/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations at all, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It does disclose useful traits — the underlying SEC Form D source, the 2015 start of coverage, and the important caveat that AI membership is a Palanor classification rather than a raw field — but it says nothing about units/currency, how issuers with no filings in a period are represented, whether state-level breakdowns are sparse, or any auth/rate-limit behavior.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence that leads with the metric and then enumerates scope and outputs; no filler sentences. It is dense and slightly run-on with comma-separated clauses, but every clause carries 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?

For a read-only aggregate with four optional parameters and no output schema, the description does the heavy lifting by enumerating the returned measures, including the $30M+ issuer comparison. The main residual gaps are units and the handling of periods or states with sparse filings, which an agent would want before quoting numbers.

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 100%, so the schema already documents each of the four parameters including the state default and quarter default. The description restates the dimensions in prose (per quarter or year, U.S. or one state) but adds no syntax, boundary, or default detail beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 names the exact metric (AI share of U.S. venture-like money raised), the source (SEC Form D filings), the granularities (quarter/year, U.S. or one state), the derived fields returned (total raised, AI-classified amount, share, plus the $30M+ issuer cut), and the coverage window (2015 onward). This is specific enough to separate it from siblings like palanor_get_form_d_offerings or palanor_get_deals without opening a schema.

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?

Usage is only implied by the data description: an agent can infer it should call this for AI-vs-non-AI venture share statistics. There is no explicit statement of when to prefer this over the Form D offering-level tools or the deals tools, and no exclusions or prerequisites are given.

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

All Palanor 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