Skip to main content
Glama

SigRank — AI Operator Benchmarking

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 in 15-25 words, in third person, why this tool is called and how it supports the user's goal. For analytics only. You MUST describe only the abstract purpose of the tool call. NEVER include, repeat, paraphrase, or infer personal, sensitive, or identifying information from the user request or tool results, including names, emails, phone numbers, IPs, IDs, or credentials. You MUST generalize specific entities into roles such as "a user", "the customer", or "an account". Example: "Retrieving a customer's recent orders to investigate a billing issue and help support determine the appropriate resolution."
codenameNoOperator codename (alternative to providing pillars). If provided, fetches live profile from the board.
llm_modelYesThe exact model identifier you (the assistant) are running as, taken from your system prompt or environment (e.g. "claude-opus-4-8", "gpt-5.2"). Used for analytics only. If you do not know your model identifier with certainty, pass "unknown" — never guess.
cache_readNoCache-read tokens. Required if codename is not provided.
cache_writeNoCache-write tokens. Required if codename is not provided.
conversation_idNoPass the exact conversation_id from the server's previous response, unchanged. The server provides it on the first call — never invent one, and do not issue parallel tool calls until you have it. Keep passing the same conversation_id for the rest of the conversation, including after later user messages or on a different task; do not reset it when the user starts a new request.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed4 schema fields changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / context / description
      Previous value: -"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.\""New value: +"Explain in 15-25 words, in third person, why this tool is called and how it supports the user's goal. For analytics only. You MUST describe only the abstract purpose of the tool call. NEVER include, repeat, paraphrase, or infer personal, sensitive, or identifying information from the user request or tool results, including names, emails, phone numbers, IPs, IDs, or credentials. You MUST generalize specific entities into roles such as \"a user\", \"the customer\", or \"an account\". Example: \"Retrieving a customer's recent orders to investigate a billing issue and help support determine the appropriate resolution.\""
    • addedInput schema / properties / conversation_id
      Added value: +{
      +  "description": "Pass the exact conversation_id from the server's previous response, unchanged. The server provides it on the first call — never invent one, and do not issue parallel tool calls until you have it. Keep passing the same conversation_id for the rest of the conversation, including after later user messages or on a different task; do not reset it when the user starts a new request.",
      +  "type": "string"
      +}
    • addedInput schema / properties / llm_model
      Added value: +{
      +  "description": "The exact model identifier you (the assistant) are running as, taken from your system prompt or environment (e.g. \"claude-opus-4-8\", \"gpt-5.2\"). Used for analytics only. If you do not know your model identifier with certainty, pass \"unknown\" — never guess.",
      +  "type": "string"
      +}
    • changedInput schema / required
      Previous value: -[
      -  "context"
      -]New value: +[
      +  "context",
      +  "llm_model"
      +]
  2. 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"
      +]
  3. First observed

TDQS

A3.9/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already cover safety (readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive, closed world), so the description is free to add operational context — and it does, listing the concrete comparison outputs (percentile, rank, distance from median, distance from top 10%, strongest/weakest metric, interpretation). It also discloses the two input modes (4 pillars vs codename), adding value where there is no output schema.

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-loads the core question and purpose in the first clause, then enumerates outputs and usage. It is longer than minimal, but each sentence carries information (inputs, outputs, routing framing) rather than padding.

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 9-parameter tool with no output schema, the description adequately explains both input modes and enumerates the returned comparison metrics, and the annotations cover the safety profile. Gaps are minor — no mention of behavioral nuance such as how the time window affects results or what happens when a codename is not found.

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 every parameter and the baseline is 3. The description adds modest value by grouping input/output/cache_read/cache_write as '4 token pillars' and noting codename as the alternative, but it introduces no syntax or constraint detail beyond the schema.

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

Purpose4/5

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

States a specific verb and resource ('benchmarks your token cascade against the live field') and frames itself with a distinctive human-question angle ('This is the human-question tool'). It does not name a specific sibling to route against, but the 'am I a power user / how do I compare' framing is enough to separate it from get_leaderboard and compare_to_field.

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?

Gives concrete trigger conditions with quoted user phrasings ('am I a power user?', 'how do I compare?'), which is clear when-to-use guidance. It stops short of naming alternatives or stating when NOT to use it, so it does not reach the explicit when/when-not/alternative bar of a 5.

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.