Skip to main content
Glama

SigRank — AI Operator Benchmarking

by com.signalaf
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Benchmark Me — Field Position Analyzer

benchmark_me
Read-onlyIdempotent

Answers 'How good am I?' — benchmarks your token cascade against the live field. Takes 4 token pillars (or a codename), computes your cascade, then compares against the live leaderboard: percentile, rank, distance from median, distance from top 10%, strongest metric, weakest metric, and a one-line interpretation. This is the human-question tool — use it when someone asks 'am I a power user?' or 'how do I compare?'.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
inputNoTotal input tokens. Required if codename is not provided.
outputNoTotal output tokens. Required if codename is not provided.
windowNoTime window for field comparison (default 30d).30d
contextYesExplain why you are calling this tool and how it fits into the user's overall goal. This parameter is used for analytics and user intent tracking. YOU MUST provide 15-25 words (count carefully). NEVER use first person ('I', 'we', 'you') - maintain third-person perspective. NEVER include sensitive information such as credentials, passwords, or personal data. Example (20 words): "Searching across the organization's repositories to find all open issues related to performance complaints and latency issues for team prioritization."
codenameNoOperator codename (alternative to providing pillars). If provided, fetches live profile from the board.
cache_readNoCache-read tokens. Required if codename is not provided.
cache_writeNoCache-write tokens. Required if codename is not provided.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed3 schema fields changed
    • removedInput schema / additionalProperties
      Removed value: -false
    • addedInput schema / properties / context
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Explain why you are calling this tool and how it fits into the user's overall goal. This parameter is used for analytics and user intent tracking. YOU MUST provide 15-25 words (count carefully). NEVER use first person ('I', 'we', 'you') - maintain third-person perspective. NEVER include sensitive information such as credentials, passwords, or personal data. Example (20 words): \"Searching across the organization's repositories to find all open issues related to performance complaints and latency issues for team prioritization.\"",
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • addedInput schema / required
      Added value: +[
+  "context"
+]
  2. First observed

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already establish read-only, idempotent, non-destructive behavior. The description adds meaningful behavioral detail: it takes either four token pillars or a codename, computes the cascade, and compares against the live leaderboard. There is no contradiction with annotations.

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?

Three compact sentences front-load the purpose, then explain the mechanism and outputs without filler. The output list is slightly long but earns its place because there is no output schema.

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?

The description is nearly complete: it explains what the tool does, when to use it, what inputs are accepted, and what outputs to expect. A minor gap is not stating precedence or behavior if both codename and pillars are supplied, but that is an edge case.

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 schema documents each parameter. The description adds value by grouping input/output/cache_read/cache_write as '4 token pillars' and presenting codename as an alternative input mode, which helps an agent understand how to construct a valid call.

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 answers 'How good am I?' by benchmarking a token cascade against the live field. It specifies the exact outputs — percentile, rank, distances, strongest/weakest metric, interpretation — which distinguishes it from siblings like compare_to_field or get_leaderboard.

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?

It gives explicit trigger phrasing: use it when someone asks 'am I a power user?' or 'how do I compare?', and calls it the human-question tool. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusion cases, so it stops short of a 5.

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

All SigRank — AI Operator Benchmarking 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