The Revenue AI Report

Search the AI tool library

search_tools

Read-onlyIdempotent

Search The Revenue AI Report AI tool library: go-to-market and revenue AI vendors with category, revenue functions, use cases, adoption effort level, and vendor claims. Ranking runs on name, description, best-for, and use cases; vendor keywords only count on an exact whole-tag match, so a generic word does not pull in unrelated vendors. Filter with category, revenueFunction, maturity (adoption effort 1 to 5), or tag. Every response returns availableFilters with the full category and revenue-function lists plus the most common vendor tags, so you can re-run a narrowed query without guessing the taxonomy. Vendor claims are the vendor's own, not Report benchmarks.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`tag`	No	Exact vendor keyword, for example 'forecasting'. See availableFilters.topTags.
`limit`	No	Default 25.
`query`	No	Keyword matched on name, description, best-for, and use cases, ranked by relevance.
`category`	No	Exact tool category, for example 'Productivity & Automation'. See availableFilters.categories.
`maturity`	No	Adoption effort level, 1 (one seat, no workflow change) to 5 (agent runs the work, human audits).
`revenueFunction`	No	Exact revenue function, for example Sales, Marketing, Customer Success, Revenue Operations. See availableFilters.functions.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`note`	Yes
`tools`	Yes
`total`	Yes
`matched`	Yes
`returned`	Yes
`adoptionLevels`	Yes
`availableFilters`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedSep 22, 2026

changedOutput schema / (root)

Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "$schema": "http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#",
+  "additionalProperties": false,
+  "properties": {
+    "adoptionLevels": {},
+    "availableFilters": {
+      "additionalProperties": {},
+      "properties": {
+        "categories": {
+          "items": {
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "type": "array"
+        },
+        "functions": {
+          "items": {
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "type": "array"
+        },
+        "maturity": {
+          "items": {
+            "type": "number"
+          },
+          "type": "array"
+        },
+        "topTags": {
+          "items": {
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "type": "array"
+        }
+      },
+      "required": [
+        "categories",
+        "functions",
+        "maturity",
+        "topTags"
+      ],
+      "type": "object"
+    },
+    "matched": {
+      "type": "number"
+    },
+    "note": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "returned": {
+      "type": "number"
+    },
+    "tools": {
+      "items": {
+        "additionalProperties": {},
+        "properties": {
+          "category": {
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "description": {
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "functions": {
+            "items": {
+              "type": "string"
+            },
+            "type": "array"
+          },
+          "maturity": {
+            "type": "number"
+          },
+          "name": {
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "slug": {
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "url": {
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "website": {
+            "type": "string"
+          }
+        },
+        "required": [
+          "slug",
+          "name",
+          "category",
+          "description",
+          "functions",
+          "maturity",
+          "website",
+          "url"
+        ],
+        "type": "object"
+      },
+      "type": "array"
+    },
+    "total": {
+      "type": "number"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "total",
+    "matched",
+    "returned",
+    "tools",
+    "adoptionLevels",
+    "availableFilters",
+    "note"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}

First observedSep 22, 2026

TDQS

A4.4/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint, and the description goes well beyond them by disclosing ranking inputs, exact-tag matching semantics, the guaranteed presence of availableFilters in every response, and the caveat that vendor claims are not Report benchmarks. 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.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is moderately long but every sentence contributes a distinct fact: purpose, ranking rule, filter options, availableFilters response behavior, and vendor-claims disclaimer. It is front-loaded with the purpose and does not waste words on fluff.

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?

Given the tool has 6 optional parameters, an output schema, and rich annotations, the description covers all essential operational semantics: what is searched, how ranking works, filter usage, how to discover valid filter values, and data provenance caveats. Nothing an agent needs to invoke it correctly is missing.

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 baseline is 3. The description mostly restates what the schema already says about query matching, category/revenueFunction/tag, and maturity scale. It adds a useful note about exact tag matching and points to availableFilters for valid values, but this is only marginal added meaning beyond 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 clearly states the verb 'Search' and the specific resource: 'The Revenue AI Report AI tool library: go-to-market and revenue AI vendors...' It is scoped enough to be distinguished from sibling tools like search_publications or search_site, and the title reinforces the same purpose.

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?

The description provides actionable usage guidance: it explains the ranking behavior, the exact whole-tag matching rule for vendor keywords, and how to use filters. It also tells users to re-run with availableFilters to refine queries. It does not explicitly state when not to use it or name alternatives, but the context is clear.

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

All The Revenue AI Report tools Inspect

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

Need Help?