Skip to main content
Glama

squirrelscan

by com.squirrelscan
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Compare two audits

compare_audits
Read-only

Compare two completed audits of one website and get what changed. Defaults to the website's latest completed audit against the one before it; pass base/head run ids to compare any two. Each finding gets one of eight kinds: new, resolved, worsened, improved, unchanged (both audits published it), still_open (still there, but one audit did not list it: the evidence store says it is open although the newer audit did not republish it, or the older audit's capped report sampled it out; sampledOut marks a clipped one, which is never counted as new; a sampled class that fails more often is listed in sampledClassGrowth and still counts as a change), not_crawled (the page was not visited, so the issue is neither fixed nor still broken), or not_checked (the newer audit could not run that rule, a capped crawl's inbound-link rules or a check that did not run, so its issue is neither fixed nor still broken; skipReason says why). resolutionEvidence says what backed the resolved verdicts; when it is "none" nothing is reported as fixed. Score movement is broken down by category. A website with only one audit returns first_run with an empty finding list; an audit where nothing moved returns changed: false. Unchanged, still-open, not-crawled and not-checked rows are omitted unless requested; totals count every kind.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
baseNoOlder run id. Default: the completed run before head.
headNoNewer run id. Default: the website's latest completed run.
limitNoMax findings returned (default 100). Totals are never capped.
website_idYesWebsite id from list_websites or run_audit.
include_unchangedNoInclude unchanged findings.
include_still_openNoInclude still-open findings (present per the evidence store, not republished).
include_not_checkedNoInclude not-checked findings (the newer audit could not run their rule).
include_not_crawledNoInclude not-crawled findings.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / include_not_checked
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Include not-checked findings (the newer audit could not run their rule).",
+  "type": "boolean"
+}
  2. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / additionalProperties
      Added value: +{}
  3. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • changedInput schema / $schema
      Previous value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"New value: +"https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema"
    • removedInput schema / additionalProperties
      Removed value: -false
  4. Added

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already establish read-only and non-destructive behavior, and the description adds substantial contextual detail: the eight finding kinds, how sampled-out findings are treated, what resolutionEvidence means, when first_run or changed:false is returned, and that omitted row types do not affect totals. This is rich behavioral disclosure beyond structured fields.

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 purpose and defaults are front-loaded, and almost every sentence carries useful semantics about finding kinds or edge cases. The single dense paragraph is long and includes a complex parenthetical taxonomy, which slightly reduces readability but does not waste much space.

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?

The tool has eight parameters, no output schema, and only simple read-only annotations; the description compensates by explaining return-state semantics, classification kinds, omission behavior, and totals. It is complete enough for an agent to call and interpret the comparison correctly.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema already defines every parameter. The description still adds value by explaining that base/head default to consecutive completed runs, that include_* flags control omission of unchanged, still-open, not-crawled, and not-checked rows, and that totals count every kind even when rows are omitted.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Compare two completed audits of one website and get what changed.' It also states the default comparison pair (latest completed audit vs. the one before it), so an agent can distinguish this from siblings like list_audits or get_report without opening the schema.

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 clearly explains when the default applies and how to override it with base/head run ids. It does not explicitly name alternative tools such as compare_entities or get_report and say when not to use this one, so usage guidance is clear but lacks sibling exclusions.

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

All squirrelscan toolsInspect
Try in Browser
Let your AI agent see the webWeb-to-screenshot MCP for Claude, Cursor and Codex. No cookie banners. Free to start.snap-render.comAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources