Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

materials

by com.spacemushroom
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Products of an organization

products_by_maker
Read-onlyIdempotent

Every product an organization is linked to, with its role on each (maker, contractor, supplier, operator, agency), the relation status, the quote and the source: "which products does Aerojet Rocketdyne have", "what did Almatech build". The organization is matched by id or part of its name. role narrows to a role containing that text, for example supplier-like words ("tanks") or "prime contractor". Only stated links are listed.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "maker": "<maker>"
    },
    "name": "products_by_maker"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
roleNoOnly links whose role contains this text, for example engine, prime contractor, structure
makerYesOrganization name or part of it, or its id (org-...)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Added

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already cover read-only, idempotent, closed-world safety, so the description's burden is lighter. It still adds real behavioral context beyond them: the result includes relation status, quotes and sources, and 'Only stated links are listed' warns that the result is not an exhaustive inference of supply relationships — a meaningful completeness caveat.

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?

The payload is front-loaded in a single dense sentence with the example queries and role semantics following, so an agent can stop reading early. The nested colon-and-quotes construction mid-sentence is slightly awkward and could be split, but no sentence is filler.

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?

With only two parameters and no output schema, the description does well by enumerating the returned fields so the agent knows what to expect. It omits any mention of result limits or pagination, which is the main remaining gap for a potentially large org-to-products listing.

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 a 3, but the description adds true semantics: role is substring/contains matching rather than exact, and it can be a supplier-like word such as 'tanks' or 'prime contractor', which tells the agent how to phrase free-text role values. It restates the maker id-or-partial-name matching already in the schema.

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 states a specific verb and resource with scope: 'Every product an organization is linked to, with its role on each', and immediately enumerates the fields returned (role, relation status, quote, source). The direction of traversal (organization → products) distinguishes it from inverse-direction siblings like orgs_for and from keyword tools like search_products or find_products.

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 concrete when-to-use context via example questions ('which products does Aerojet Rocketdyne have', 'what did Almatech build') and explains how to narrow with the role filter. However, it never names an alternative tool or states when-not to use this one — an agent choosing between this and orgs_for or product_graph gets no explicit routing guidance.

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

All materials 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