Mark

Set Competitor Aliases

set_competitor_aliases

Idempotent

Replaces a competitor's other names (up to 5). An AI answer that uses its name or any alias counts as naming it, in past weeks' answers too. Trims each name, drops duplicates and the competitor's own name; an empty list goes back to the name only. Related: list_competitors, rename_competitor, get_competitor_scorecard.

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": {
      "competitorId": "<competitorId>",
      "aliases": "<aliases>"
    },
    "name": "set_competitor_aliases"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`aliases`	Yes	The full list of other names, like ["Acme"] for "Acme Corp". Replaces the current list.
`competitorId`	Yes	Competitor id from list_competitors.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`competitor`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedNov 4, 2026

changedInput schema / properties / aliases / description

Previous value: -"The full list of other names, like [\"Casita\"] for \"Casita Builders\". Replaces the current list."New value: +"The full list of other names, like [\"Acme\"] for \"Acme Corp\". Replaces the current list."

AddedOct 14, 2026

TDQS

A3.9/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare this as a non-read-only but idempotent and non-destructive write, so the bar is lower; the description nonetheless adds substantial semantics: full replacement of the existing list, a cap of 5, trimming, duplicate removal, dropping the competitor's own name, empty-list reset behavior, and the retroactive effect on past weeks' answers. That last point is genuinely non-obvious. It stops short of stating permissions or what the response confirms.

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 sentences, front-loaded with the action and its limit, followed by scoring impact and normalization rules, then a short related-tools pointer. No sentence is redundant and nothing is buried.

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 required params and an output schema covering return values, the description supplies what matters: replacement semantics, the cap, normalization, and the scoring consequence. Minor gaps remain, such as case sensitivity or per-alias length limits, but they are unlikely to change how an agent calls it.

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 3, but the description earns a bump by adding constraints absent from the schema: the 5-alias cap and the normalization rules (trim, dedupe, drop the competitor's own name) that tell the agent what will actually be stored. Only the empty-list semantics are already echoed by the schema's 'Replaces the current list.'

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?

The description opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Replaces a competitor's other names (up to 5).' That distinguishes it from the similar-sounding set_business_aliases (own brand) and rename_competitor, though the separation is implicit rather than stated. An agent can tell what the tool does 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 Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Usage is only implied through the 'Related:' list — list_competitors supplies the competitorId, and rename_competitor/get_competitor_scorecard are adjacent operations. There is no explicit statement of when to call this versus set_business_aliases, nor any when-not condition. Adequate but leaves routing to inference.

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

All Mark 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?