Skip to main content
Glama

Whimbrel MedTech Analyst

by com.whimbrelresearch
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Find companies

find
Read-onlyIdempotent

Finds US medical device companies by device, technology or space, a role being hired, a state or a date. One search across every kind of signal, answered as companies: a device, technology or space in plain words (about), and optionally a role being hired, a US state or a date. Looks at device trials, FDA device makers, filings and news, and hiring, folds them into one row per company with its evidence and sources, leaves out the rep's clients and the companies that are not a fit, and ranks the rest for what was asked and what the rep's firm sells. With no device or role named ("who should I reach out to?"), it leads with the companies Whimbrel ranks first for the rep's firm.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
askNoOptional: the rep's request in their words, when it says more than about does (e.g. 'who just raised money and is still pre-clearance').
roleNoOptional: a role being hired, e.g. 'design transfer', 'sterilization'.
aboutNoA device, technology or space, e.g. 'balloon catheter', 'spinal implants', 'wearable glucose'.
limitNoMost companies to return (default 15, max 25).
sinceNoOptional ISO date; evidence on or after it.
stateNoOptional US state name.
looking_forNoOptional: limit to some kinds of evidence.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / ask
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Optional: the rep's request in their words, when it says more than about does (e.g. 'who just raised money and is still pre-clearance').",
+  "type": "string"
+}
  2. Added

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already cover the safety profile (readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive), but the description adds real behavioral depth: it names the data sources (trials, FDA device makers, filings and news, hiring), states the aggregation ('one row per company with its evidence and sources'), discloses exclusions (rep's clients and non-fit companies), and explains the ranking basis. It stops short of freshness, latency or auth details, but this is well beyond what the annotations convey.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

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

Purpose is front-loaded in the first sentence, but the body is padded and circular, repeating 'a device, technology or space' three times and re-listing the filter dimensions already given up front. Several clauses could be cut without losing information.

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 no output schema, 7 optional parameters and a rich annotation set, the description does the necessary work: it covers input modes, evidence sources, filtering, ranking and the empty-query fallback, and sketches the result shape. It is close to complete for an agent to call it correctly, missing only output-field specifics.

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 every parameter is already documented, and the description largely restates them ('a role being hired, a US state or a date'). The one added nuance is that `about` is free-form plain words and that a vague ask routes to firm-ranked results, but no syntax or format detail is added beyond the schema. Baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Finds US medical device companies') plus the filter dimensions, and explicitly scopes the output shape ('answered as companies') which separates it from the people/news siblings. An agent can tell it is the umbrella company-search tool without opening a 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?

It gives an implied usage pattern and one explicit scenario ('With no device or role named... it leads with the companies Whimbrel ranks first'), which tells the agent the tool works with zero arguments. However, it never names an alternative or a when-not condition (e.g. use `company` for a known company, `people` for people), so the routing guidance stays implicit.

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

All Whimbrel MedTech Analyst 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