Skip to main content
Glama

Wafergraph MCP

by com.wafergraph

Find common suppliers

find_common_suppliers

The shared-upstream question over a set of companies: given 2-15 company ids/tickers, or a segment id (uses every company in that segment), rank suppliers by how many of the input companies they documentedly serve (e.g. 'serves 9 of 12'), with each supplier's market position and country. Also reports how many input companies had no documented suppliers at all, since that makes a low overlap number ambiguous.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNoMax number of ranked suppliers to return (1-100, default 20).
segmentNoUse every company in this taxonomy segment id instead of an explicit list (see get_segments).
company_idsNo2-15 company ids, names, or tickers. Exactly one of company_ids/segment is required.

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

No annotations provided; description reveals ranking logic, output fields (overlap count, market position, country), and handling of uncovered companies. Provides sufficient transparency for a read-only ranking tool.

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?

Two sentences, each adding distinct value: first states the core function, second clarifies an important nuance. No redundancy.

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?

Describes return fields (ranked list with overlap counts, market position, country, uncovered count) despite missing output schema. Lacks info on error handling or limits beyond the 'limit' parameter.

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 baseline 3. Description adds context about the ranking logic and the ambiguity note, adding value beyond parameter descriptions.

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?

Clearly states the tool ranks suppliers by overlap count for a set of companies, with details on market position and country. Distinguishes from siblings like find_chokepoints by focusing on common suppliers.

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?

Explains input format (ids/tickers or segment) and company count range, and notes ambiguity if many companies lack suppliers. Does not explicitly compare to alternatives or state when not to use.

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

All Wafergraph MCP toolsInspect
Try in Browser
RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Disambiguation5/5

Each tool has a clearly distinct purpose: analyzing portfolio exposure, comparing companies, finding chokepoints, getting company details, country exposure, deals, segments, supply chain walk, and company search. No overlap in functionality.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tool names follow a consistent verb_noun pattern using snake_case (e.g., 'get_company', 'search_companies', 'find_chokepoints'). The convention is uniform and predictable.

Tool Count5/5

9 tools is well-scoped for a specialized supply chain analysis server. Each tool serves a distinct query or analysis need without being too few or too many.

Completeness4/5

The tool set covers core operations: search, detail, comparison, portfolio analysis, chokepoint identification, country exposure, deals, and supply chain graph traversal. Minor gaps like historical trends or alerts exist but do not hinder primary use cases.

Resources